Tag Archives: in vitro

In Vitro Risk Assessment for a Nano Fuel Additive: Tanks or No Tanks?

By | Bio | Published: May 9, 2008

John BalbusJohn Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., is Chief Health Scientist.

The history of health and environmental impacts of fuel additives is not a pretty one.  From tetra-ethyl lead to methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), we’ve learned the hard way that what goes in the tank ends up in our bodies and the environment sooner or later.  Getting a thorough understanding of the potential risks of a new fuel additive at an early stage is essential to avoid a lot of harm, suffering, and economic costs down the line.

A new study by Park et al. has assessed the potential respiratory risks of a fuel additive called Envirox (nanoparticulate cerium oxide), giving it a clean bill of health based only on in vitro tests.  Is this the vision of the future of risk assessment?  Should we feel safe? Read More »

Posted in Health Science, Nanotechnology | Also tagged , | Comments closed

On the Road to In Vitro Testing: Are We There Yet?

By | Bio | Published: March 18, 2008

John BalbusJohn Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., is Chief Health Scientist.

EPA’s recently released draft Nanotechnology Research Strategy (NRS) proposes a tiered testing system to evaluate human toxicity of nanomaterials.  It puts in vitro tests, or those done in test tubes and petri dishes as opposed to living animals, front and center.  EPA says the results of the first, in vitro tier will be used for guidance on “what health endpoints to monitor” and the second, in vivo tier will then help “identify those in vitro assays that correlate with in vivo nanomaterial toxicity or health effects.”

Wait a second.  If the in vivo testing is necessary in order to figure out what the in vitro testing results really mean, how can the agency use the in vitro testing results to figure out what health endpoints to monitor?  This cart and horse confusion is a serious matter. Read More »

Posted in Health Science, Nanotechnology | Also tagged , | Comments closed

Nano “Trojan Horse” Study Gets Top Billing

By | Bio | Published: March 7, 2008

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

Each year, the journal Environmental Science & Technology selects a list of Top Papers it has published that are “expected to have a significant and long-lasting impact on the field.” For 2007, its choice for the top environmental science paper addresses a curious facet of the behavior of certain metal oxide nanoparticles:  They can behave as “Trojan horses,” getting inside cultured lung cells and causing significant damage. Read More »

Posted in Health Science | Tagged | Comments closed

  • About this blog

    Science, health, and business experts at Environmental Defense Fund comment on chemical and nanotechnology issues of the day.

    Effective April, 2009, we have expanded the scope of our blog to encompass our work and perspectives on both chemicals and nanomaterials.

    Our work: Chemicals

  • Get blog posts by email

    Subscribe via RSS

  • Categories

  • Filter posts by tags


    • aggregate exposure (9)
    • American Chemistry Council (ACC) (49)
    • arsenic (3)
    • asthma (3)
    • Australia (1)
    • biomonitoring (9)
    • bipartisan (6)
    • bisphenol A (14)
    • BP Oil Disaster (18)
    • Canada (7)
    • carbon nanotubes (24)
    • carcinogen (19)
    • Carcinogenic Mutagenic or Toxic for Reproduction (CMR) (11)
    • CDC (6)
    • Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) (13)
    • chemical identity (30)
    • chemical testing (1)
    • Chicago Tribune (6)
    • children's safety (18)
    • China (10)
    • computational toxicology (9)
    • Confidential Business Information (CBI) (40)
    • conflict of interest (1)
    • consumer products (43)
    • Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) (4)
    • contamination (4)
    • cumulative exposure (4)
    • data requirements (41)
    • diabetes (4)
    • DNA methylation (4)
    • DuPont (11)
    • endocrine disruption (23)
    • epigenetics (3)
    • exposure and hazard (38)
    • FDA (8)
    • flame retardants (17)
    • formaldehyde (13)
    • front group (13)
    • Globally Harmonized System (GHS) (5)
    • Government Accountability Office (5)
    • hazard (5)
    • High Production Volume (HPV) (22)
    • in vitro (13)
    • in vivo (10)
    • industry tactics (38)
    • inhalation (18)
    • IUR/CDR (25)
    • Japan (3)
    • lead (6)
    • mercury (4)
    • methylmercury (2)
    • microbiome (3)
    • nanosilver (6)
    • National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (16)
    • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (7)
    • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) (5)
    • National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) (6)
    • obesity (6)
    • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (3)
    • Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) (3)
    • Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (12)
    • Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) (3)
    • oil dispersant (18)
    • PBDEs (14)
    • Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) (20)
    • pesticides (7)
    • phthalates (14)
    • polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) (5)
    • prenatal (6)
    • prioritization (31)
    • risk assessment (60)
    • Safe Chemicals Act (24)
    • Safer Chemicals Healthy Families (33)
    • Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) (15)
    • Small business (1)
    • South Korea (3)
    • styrene (5)
    • Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) (12)
    • test rule (13)
    • tributyltin (3)
    • trichloroethylene (TCE) (3)
    • Turkey (3)
    • U.S. states (12)
    • vulnerable populations (1)
    • worker safety (21)

  • Archives