EDF Health

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

By John Balbus / Published: March 18, 2008

John 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 »

Also posted in Emerging testing methods, Health science / Tagged , , | Read 1 Response

Stating the Obvious: Nano Cosmetics Risk Assessment is Inadequate

By / Published: March 5, 2008

Richard Denison, PhD, is a Senior Scientist.

Just after publishing my last post, I learned that the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Products has released a new Scientific Opinion that concludes current risk assessment procedures and methods applied to cosmetics, in particular sunscreens, are insufficient. Read More »

Also posted in Health science / Tagged , | Authors: / Read 1 Response

What Was the White House Thinking?

By / Published: March 4, 2008

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

It’s been a few months now since the White House took the unusual step of articulating some “Principles for Nanotechnology EH&S Oversight.” Given recent events, it’s worth again reflecting on this official memorandum, which was signed by the heads of the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and sent to the heads of all federal agencies and departments.

Despite the title, it’s very hard not to read this document as one intended primarily to throw up barriers to effective oversight. Read More »

Also posted in Health policy, Regulation / Tagged , | Authors: / Read 3 Responses

Wishful Thinking ≠ Safety

By / Published: February 22, 2008

Cal Baier-Anderson, PhD, is a Health Scientist.

In the current regulatory environment, where there are no regulations that specifically take into account the unique properties of engineered nanomaterials, industry has by default the primary responsibility for their safe production and use. Is industry taking this responsibility seriously?

Two recent studies, one in Europe and one in the U.S., shed light on this question and reveal some reasons to be concerned. Read More »

Also posted in Health science / Tagged , , | Authors: / Comments are closed

Nanoparticles on the brain?

By John Balbus / Published: February 21, 2008

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

It’s been a worry for engineered nanoparticles. Now, a new study from the Harvard School of Public Health (Suglia et al., 2008) is the first to suggest that particulate air pollution not only damages the lungs and heart, but also may damage the developing brain.

Researchers measured cognitive function in over 200 children in Boston in relation to their residential exposure to traffic-related air pollution by measuring airborne carbon black particles. They found the IQ-lowering effect of higher exposure is comparable to a pregnant mother smoking 10 cigarettes a day or moderate lead exposure. Read More »

Also posted in Emerging science, Health science / Tagged , | Read 3 Responses

NNI’s new strategy: Not quite

By / Published: February 20, 2008

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

Just when you thought it might never emerge, the National Nanotechnology Initiative’s (NNI) Strategy for Nanotechnology-Related Environmental, Health and Safety Research (PDF, 2.2 MB ) finally hit the streets last week.

It’s got good, bad and ugly. The good news is that here, at last, is a report from NNI that actually reads more like a strategy and less like yet another laundry list of research needs. The bad news is that key elements of a full strategy are still nowhere to be found. Read More »

Also posted in Health policy / Tagged , , | Authors: / Read 1 Response