Nano's Rapid Transit System

John BalbusCal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.

In 2004, Gunter Oberdorster and colleagues demonstrated that upon inhalation, ultrafine particles, the dimensions of which are measured in nanometers, can move from the nasal passages of rodents to the brain via a specialized nerve called the olfactory bulb.  The evolutionary purpose of the olfactory bulb is to relay information about odors directly and rapidly from the nose to the brain.

The extent to which rapid transit via the olfactory bulb is a significant potential route of exposure to engineered nanomaterials is still an open question.  But two new papers add support for the relevance of this intriguing exposure pathway, raising important questions regarding the safety of inhaled nanoparticles.

The first paper, by Jiangxue Wang and colleagues, followed the movement of nanoscale titanium dioxide (TiO2) particles placed directly in the nasal passages of mice to the brain via the olfactory bulb.  When they looked to see where in the brain the TiO2 went, they found it went pretty much everywhere, although after 30 days the highest concentrations were found in the olfactory bulb and hippocampus.  Moreover, the brain tissue of the exposed mice exhibited changes in structure and biochemistry consistent with damage from reactive oxygen compounds.

Nanoscale silver was the subject of the second paper by Jae Hyuck Sung and colleagues.  Instead of a single exposure, rats were exposed to nanosilver in the air for 13 weeks.  Like an earlier 28-day inhalation study, this one also found widespread distribution of nanosilver in the rats.

This study also sought to determine if there were any health effects associated with longer-term exposures.  And they did find effects:  inflammation in the lungs, and subtle cellular changes in the livers that are sometimes indicative of pre-cancerous conditions.

Nanosilver was detected in both the olfactory bulb and the brain but unfortunately the paper did not report on any effects that might have been associated with the presence of nanosilver.  It is not clear from the description provided if the extent of examination of the brain would have been able to identify subtle effects if they were present.

So what should the next steps be?  Elucidating the possible impacts of nanoscale materials on the brain is tricky, in part because the effects could be very diverse, requiring lots of different types of tests to capture them.  While damage to brain cells may be relatively easy to discern, other effects, such as those altering brain development or biochemistry, may require more sophisticated testing.

While it is often assumed that inhalation exposure to nanomaterials will be limited primarily to workplaces, such materials are also being used in consumer products that can be widely dispersed.  This is particularly true of nanosilver, which can be found in sprays that release nanosilver into the air.  This is why we have repeatedly advocated that such dispersive uses be avoided until more is known about the potential adverse effects that could come with these kinds of exposures.

This entry was posted in Emerging Science, Health Science and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

3 Comments

  1. stefanie
    Posted December 22, 2008 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    If nanotechnology becomes a part of everyday life, nothing would have to change dramatically on the outside.
    http://www.espol.edu.ec/nanotecnologia/foro/

  2. Jyoti A R
    Posted February 28, 2009 at 5:15 am | Permalink

    Yes, Nanotechnology is developing at a very fast pace but my question still remains. Will it grow to such an extent in the next 25 years that we would actually have to think about its harmful effects on living beings??

  3. Posted March 23, 2009 at 10:35 pm | Permalink

    I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

    Joannah

    http://2gbmemory.net

  • About this blog


    Science, health, and business experts at Environmental Defense Fund comment on chemical and nanotechnology issues of the day.
    Our work: Chemicals
  • Categories

  • Get blog posts by email

    Subscribe via RSS

  • Filter posts by tags

    • aggregate exposure (10)
    • Alternatives assessment (3)
    • American Chemistry Council (ACC) (57)
    • arsenic (3)
    • asthma (3)
    • Australia (1)
    • biomonitoring (9)
    • bipartisan (6)
    • bisphenol A (19)
    • BP Oil Disaster (18)
    • California (1)
    • Canada (7)
    • carbon nanotubes (24)
    • carcinogen (22)
    • Carcinogenic Mutagenic or Toxic for Reproduction (CMR) (12)
    • CDC (6)
    • Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) (13)
    • chemical identity (30)
    • chemical testing (1)
    • Chemicals in Commerce Act (3)
    • Chicago Tribune (6)
    • children's safety (23)
    • China (10)
    • computational toxicology (11)
    • Confidential Business Information (CBI) (53)
    • conflict of interest (7)
    • consumer products (48)
    • Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) (4)
    • contamination (4)
    • cumulative exposure (4)
    • data requirements (46)
    • dermal exposure (1)
    • diabetes (4)
    • DNA methylation (4)
    • DuPont (11)
    • endocrine disruption (28)
    • epigenetics (4)
    • exposure and hazard (49)
    • FDA (8)
    • flame retardants (20)
    • formaldehyde (15)
    • front group (13)
    • general interest (22)
    • Globally Harmonized System (GHS) (5)
    • Government Accountability Office (5)
    • hazard (6)
    • High Production Volume (HPV) (22)
    • in vitro (14)
    • in vivo (11)
    • industry tactics (44)
    • informed substitution (1)
    • inhalation (18)
    • IUR/CDR (27)
    • Japan (3)
    • lead (6)
    • markets (1)
    • mercury (4)
    • methylmercury (2)
    • microbiome (3)
    • nanosilver (6)
    • National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (20)
    • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (7)
    • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) (5)
    • National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) (7)
    • National Toxicology Program (1)
    • obesity (6)
    • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (3)
    • Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) (4)
    • Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (16)
    • Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) (3)
    • oil dispersant (18)
    • PBDEs (16)
    • Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) (22)
    • pesticides (7)
    • phthalates (17)
    • polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) (5)
    • prenatal (6)
    • prioritization (35)
    • report on carcinogens (1)
    • revised CSIA (4)
    • risk assessment (69)
    • Safe Chemicals Act (24)
    • Safer Chemicals Healthy Families (33)
    • Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) (20)
    • Small business (1)
    • South Korea (4)
    • styrene (6)
    • Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) (15)
    • systematic review (1)
    • test rule (17)
    • tributyltin (3)
    • trichloroethylene (TCE) (3)
    • Turkey (3)
    • U.S. states (14)
    • vulnerable populations (1)
    • Walmart (2)
    • worker safety (23)
    • WV chemical spill (11)