interesting read about the state of nano development and technology, risks and benefits.

no your nano

there are discussions about laws against cigarette smoke and fine dust, while time is due to regulate the nano market. nobody can tell what the effect of those products with synthetically produced nanoparticles will be, especially when it enters the blood stream, get inhaled or released into the environment.

according to the woodrow wilson center 350 nano products ( dec 2006) left the lab already and around 600 different nano materials are in the wild. not all of them labeled, though, not all of them dangerous as nano was out there before the world called it nano (ie lotus effect).

babel what nano means: new material, size, ...?
and confusion what it causes and how to control nano particles. there is no way to measure their behaviour yet. what makes it so exciting is the fact that chemical elements change properties when they get divided again and again. well that's what it is all about, anyhow.

coating is interesting for the textile industry as is nanotech, but i don't think it's pretty wise of the cosmetic and food industry to add nanoparticles and react while critized in an ignorant way:

in may 2006 eight environmental and consumer protection organisations petitioned the us government to remove from the market all cosmetic products with synthetically produced nanoparticles (mainly titanium oxide and zinc oxyde in suncreams). the reasion: to prevent a potential health hazard. both the us health authorities and the cosmetic industry denied that there was any danger. | no your nano

the empa institute near st.gallen tested the toxicity of various materials for a short time and concludes:

nanoparticles of silicon oxide, titanium oxide and cerium oxide impair lung cell metabolism in the short time, while nanoparticles of iron oxide and zinc oxide cause significant harm | no your nano, also see empa

the invisible world holds a lot of promises and some of the things are really really nice; even the inwoven semiconducter is a far cry from realisation as is the notion to buy a t-shirt as a tool. ( consider stretching electronics, washability, salt and sweat resistance, ...)
there are ethic boards in place, not just in europe, however it seems industry runs faster as their ability to raise the voice. so why are they there? what's their role? now scientists from the field start to speak out and ask governments for regulation instead of just pushing and supporting everything that calls itself nano.

there has been a lot of hype on carbon nanotubes, but also a lot of doubts. in the end it all comes down to the point that it's good for getting research money. just call it nano. no matter what. downscaling has going on for a long time in material research and playing around in the nanoworld is nothing really new. materials today reports on the topic and also has an interesting comment from nicole grobert: nanotubes grow or go.

It has even been suggested that
nanotubes could be used to construct a space
elevator ...

it will take a long time until predictions of that kind will be more than fiction.

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) were first identified by Morinobu Endo et al.in the late 1970s and caused
tremendous interest when Sumio Iijima published
his paper in Nature in 1991 ...

material science is not a quick shot, but the window of opportunity is just a glimps for one or another cio.

was hat körpergröße mit schulbildung, familienstand und berufsleben zu tun? yessas.
1999, der durchschnitt der personen über 30 en austria mit pflichtschule, aber ohne lehre war 165,8cm groß; an der uni hingegen trafen sich die 172cmtler.

ledige setzten die latte auf 171,5cm und geschiedene brachten es auf 168,5.

also wirklich. einzig verwertbar daran ist die aussage: 20jährige 171,5 und "85 und mehr" 162,9 punto und danke östat.