Nanotechnology: Do You Know What It Is? Do You Care?

August 24, 2009

No. Nanotechnology is not what makes iPod's Nano possible. If only it were that simple. But it really begs the question, Do you know what nanotech is? And for those of you who have a pretty good idea, Do you care?

The reason I ask is that lately I've been noticing a flutter of announcements, commentaries, and news pieces about whether nanotechnology is safe or not. For example, last fall, Andrew Maynard, chief scientist at Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, testified before the U.S. Congress’s House Science Committee, saying that the government is not doing enough to ensure the safety of these materials.

Interactive Map Shows Nano Metros

August 20, 2009

Looking for a job in nanotechnology? You might want to check out just where the nano hot spots are around the country. I have just the resource. The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies created an interactive map of the United States showing the locations of the more than 1,200 companies, universities, government laboratories, and organizations working in nanotechnology.

New "Science As Art" Image Posted

June 11, 2009

I just noticed that the Materials Research Society finally posted the winners from their Spring 2009 "Science As Art," images. They are way cool.

The Battle is On!

March 30, 2009

Nanotechnology offers potential for detecting and treating cancer without altering healthy cells. That means targeted death for cancerous tumors without the negative side effects of conventional therapies, like chemotherapy and radiation. We'll take a look at some of these methods and also explore the risks and promises of this new scientific field.

• Top 10: Ways Nanotechnology Battles Cancer
  There's a new set of nanotechnology tools to battle cancer that are so small, you can't see them. But these nanoparticles could help fight cancer cells, while at the same reducing the negative impact traditional treatments have on patients.

• News: Sugar-Coated Nanoparticles Track Down, Destroy Tumors
  Nanoparticles that first illuminate and then destroy hidden tumors have been created by scientists at the University of California, San Diego.

• News: Hollow Gold Nanospheres Burn Tumors
  Hollow gold nanospheres that actively search for and burn tumors could prove particularly effective against malignant Melanoma, a deadly form of skin cancer responsible for around 48,000 deaths worldwide each year. Story link coming soon.

• Video: Nanotechnology Promises
  Nanotechnology's potential benefits come in the spotlight as Jorge Ribas talks with Andrew Maynard, chief science advisor for the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies.

• Puzzle: Nanotech Attacks Cancer
  Cancer-fighting nanoparticles find and attack tumors, a treatment that one day may eliminate the need for chemotherapy.

• IM Interview: Nano Swat Teams Kill Cancer
  Tracy Staedter chats with Geoffrey vonMaltzahn, who builds networks of artificial nanoparticles that communicate with each other to find cancer cells and destroy them.

• My Take: Nanotech Tests, Not All the Same
  Nanoparticles include many molecular types that differ significantly in their properties -- even within the same class of material. For this reason, each nanoparticle should be considered on a case-by-case basis, and scientists should be cautious about making generalizations.

• Video: Nanotechnology Risks
  Jorge Ribas talks with Andrew Maynard, chief science advisor for the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, about the risks of nanotechnology. Story link coming soon.

Photo: iStockphoto

Nano Dreadlocks

January 13, 2009

DNA has it. Galaxies have it. Beetle shells have it. An essential spiral pattern. How does nature do it? Scientists at Harvard are one step closer to the answer. They've managed to get some tiny bristles to self-assemble into helical shapes (right).

The work will help advance the science of self-assembly and pattern formation and there could be applications of the technique for energy storage.

The scientist started with small bristles that were standing upright like bristles in a brush. They then immersed the bristles in a liquid. As the liquid evaporated, the capillary forces caused the strands to deform and to adhere to one another like braided hair, forming the spiral patterns.

I just think they look cool and want to see more.

Photo: Courtesy of the Aizenberg lab at the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Public Nano-tudes: Context Matters

December 11, 2008

If you've been following along, then you know that Nature Nanotechnology is devoting three articles to people's perception of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Tuesday, I summarized the article hailing from Dan Kahan of Yale Law School. Yesterday, I'm gave you an overview of Dietram Scheufele's study, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. And today, I'll be giving you the run down of Nick Pidgeon's (Cardiff) study, "Deliberating the Risks of Nanotechnologies for Energy and Health Applications in the United States  and United Kingdom."

Here are some interesting points about the study. First, Pidgeon and his team point out that, in general, whether a new technology gets accepted depends on people's perceptions of both its benefit and risk. So how do you know what people's perceptions are? Usually, you survey them. But here the researchers say, "surveys cannot easily uncover the ways that people will interpret and understand the complexities of nanotechnologies (or any other topic about which they know very little) when asked to deliberate about it in more depth, so new approaches...are needed."

So instead of a survey, they conducted four, half-day workshops. Here are some things that they found:

• Benefit, not risk, seems to frame nanotech risk perception
• A high regard for science and tech can be accompanied by the strong opinion that society will somehow fail to use the technology appropriately.
• The type of nanotechnology application matters.
• Workshop participants showed little distinction between present, near-term or long-term applications.
• Participants tended to want to talk more about the social implications of nanotechnology rather than the technology itself.

Because the workshop allowed the researchers to get at more specific reasons or opinions than a survey, they found qualitative differences in people's perceptions as well as subtle shades of cross-national differences. They say, "This implies that, as nanotechnology risk perceptions emerge, context matters. In particular, much will depend upon whether early risks are adequately managed to avoid major incidents, and whether appropriate systems of risk governance can be evolved in parallel."

 

Public Nano-tudes, 2 of 3

December 10, 2008

This week Nature Nanotechnology is devoting three articles to people's perception of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Yesterday, I summarized the article hailing from Dan Kahan of Yale Law School. Today, I'm summarizing the study from Dietram Scheufele of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. And tomorrow, I'll be talking about research from Nick Pidgeon of Cardiff University in the U.K.

Scheufele's study, "Religious Beliefs and Public Attitudes Toward Nanotechnology in Europe and the United States," examines the potential conflict between religiosity and science.

A few interesting notes:

• Historically, as Western countries have become more wealthy, they have become more secularized. With the exception of the United States, however, which hasn't changed in terms of its emphasis on religion since the 1950s.
• In the study, more than 70 percent of respondents did not think nanotechnology was morally acceptable. And those same people did not approve of nanotech under any circumstances.
• Of those that thought nanotech was morally acceptable, 90 percent approved of it "as long as the ususal levels of government regulation are in place."
• Support for nanotechnology strongly correlates with moral views toward it.

In short, the study found a healthy relationship between religion and support for nanotech. Why should we care? Because it could affect how nanotech gets regulated. Here's the deal: some people, even if they are highly knowledgeable about nanotech, may chose to discount information that could ultimately be critical to a policy.

Image: Walter Bibikow 

More on Public Attitudes About Nanotech 1 of 3

December 09, 2008

This week Nature Nanotechnology has three articles devoted to people's perception of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. The articles hail from Dan Kahan of Yale Law School, Dietram Scheufele of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Nick Pidgeon of Cardiff University in the U.K. I'm going to spend this blog and the next two summarizing the studies, which are quite insightful. I'll start with Kahan's research.

Kahan and his team designed a public opinion study, using 1,862 Americans. The participants were divided into two groups based on answers they gave to how much they knew about nanotechnology. The people who knew very little about it were put into a "no-information condition" group, and those who expressed knowing quite a bit where put into the "information-exposed condition" group.

Both groups were asked to read two paragraphs of equal length, one of which identified the benefits and the other of which identified the risks of nanotech. Then they were asked about their perceptions of the technology.

The interesting thing is that exposure to information, to facts and figures, seemed to have no effect on a person's perception of the risk or benefit of nanotechnology. It turns out that people's perceptions were based more on their cultural world view. For example, people who described themselves as individualistic and had pro-commerce values typically inferred that nanotechnology was safe. On the other hand, people who were more worried about economic inequality saw nanotechnology as holding more risk.

In short, providing people with information may not sway their opinions to your side. The authors say:

"Our study reinforces the conclusions of other researchers who have cautioned against assuming that enlightened public opinion will spontaneously emerge from accumulating science information on the risks and benefits of nanotechnology."

Image: Tamas Galambos

Weekly Preview -- Dec 8

December 08, 2008

Monday, Dec. 8
Magnet Meltdown
Why did the Large Hadron Collider break down and how do scientists and engineers plan to fix it? Clark Boyd sheds light on this and other technology with his weekly podcast. Listen in.

Video: The Skinny On Clean Rooms
Some people wear business suits to work, but scientists who build semiconductors wear "bunny suits.” Tracy Staedter and Kasey-Dee Gardner learn the ins and outs of clean room couture.

Tuesday, Dec. 9
Solve the Biomimetic Robot Puzzle

Guest Spot Invitation blog: Student researcher David Ellis talks about his area of research and what it's like to be a freshly designated PhD researchers who's still a little wet behind the ears.

Wednesday, Dec. 10
Engineering Works! podcast, courtesy Texas A&M University's Gene Charleton.

Thursday, Dec. 11
The Top 10 languages on the Internet. Can you guess what they are?

Friday, Dec. 12
Opalescent nano-sized particles are being developed for use in drug delivery, special coatings, sensors and more. See the slide show featuring different views of these beautiful nanojewels.