Nanotech, blows pastetta air
Washington – The US report that was supposed to take stock of research on nanoparticle technologies was released to the public last August by a working group of the Nanoscale Science Engineering and Technology Subcommittee (NSET), part of the National Science and Technology Council American. A massive project to classify and prioritize studies on the potential harmful effects of nanotech applied to the environment and human metabolism, a study that is now being heavily criticized by David Rejeski (pictured), head of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies at the Wilson Center.
“Federal research into the hazards of nanotechnology is a bit like a ship without a captain, and it is unclear who is responsible for steering this ship in the right direction and making sure it reaches its destination,” Rejeski alarmed.
The NSET Panel report, which follows the Food and Drug Administration’s opinion on the non-dangerousness of nanotechnology products until proven otherwise fails for Rejeski to be that “carefully crafted federal research plan on the effects of nanotechnology on the environment, health and safety that has been urgently required to be created by the leaders of both parties in Congress, by industry , investment companies, scientists and consumer organizations ”.
Between the most serious shortcomings the expert mentions the expense budgets prepared, the timing of implementation of the projects and the assignment of precise responsibilities to well-defined subjects. A report that “reflects the failure of the government,” says Rejeski, after the distribution of more 8 billion dollars for nanotechnology research since fiscal 2001.
Research whose onerous task should go, according to Rejeski, to those control organizations such as the FDA, EPA and others that they already have adequate structures to safeguard their respective areas of interest . “If this document is truly the basis of a risk strategy, there is still a long way to go,” concludes Rejeski.