John Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., is Chief Health Scientist.
At its most recent meeting a few weeks ago, the US Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to the International Standards Organization (ISO) Technical Committee on Nanotechnologies approved a motion to have ISO develop a Technical Report based on the EDF-Dupont Nano Risk Framework (NRF). Or to put it another way in acronym-laden Washington-speak, the US TAG to the ANSI-accredited ISO TC229 approved a TR based on the EDF-DD NRF. Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
The insurance industry is out in front on nanotechnology yet again. As the giant reinsurer Swiss Re did way back in May 2004 with its groundbreaking report Nanotechnology: Small matter, many unknowns, it is once again the insurance industry sounding an early alarm about nanomaterials. In this case, it’s the Continental Western Insurance Group (CWG), which has just announced that it will exclude coverage for “the, as of yet, unknown and unknowable risks created by the products and processes that involve nanotubes.” Read More
Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.
I have just finished reading yet another depressing/infuriating publication by the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. The new report delineates the many limitations faced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in addressing nanotechnology health risks. The law governing the CPSC has significant weaknesses that prevent it from meeting critical needs, such as constraints on the ability to collect data, require reporting of known hazards, order recalls and promulgate mandatory safety standards.
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
EDF’s recent news release that gave a less-than-glowing review to the performance of EPA’s Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program (NMSP) engendered a critique from Michael Heintz of Porter & Wright, accusing us of being “irresponsible” and potentially “sector damaging.” Our release had lamented the mediocre level of participation and lack of transparency surrounding the NMSP. I’ve posted a reply to Michael’s post, but also want to post it here. Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
A growing number of observers of nanotechnology policy in the U.S. – at least those outside the U.S. government! – recognize that the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is poorly suited both to spur the generation of sufficient information about nanomaterials, and to ensure that information indicating potential risks will trigger meaningful action. So why not just tweak TSCA to make it work better for nano? Read More
Scott Walsh, MBA, is a Project Manager.
Nanotechnology is a global phenomenon: Organizations all over the world are working to develop and deploy nanotechnology applications. Interest in minimizing the potential health, environmental and safety risks of nanotechnology is similarly global. One of many indications: Over the past year, EDF and DuPont’s Nano Risk Framework has been downloaded more than 3,000 times in nearly 100 countries.
Recognizing the international interest in the Framework, EDF and DuPont have now made it available in three major languages: Mandarin, French, and Spanish. (The Framework’s executive summary is also available in Portuguese.) These translations will allow organizations around the world to better understand and apply the Framework’s guidance to assess, mitigate, and communicate about potential nanomaterial risks.
