EDF Health

EPA’s Nano Consent Order, Part II: What About the Lifecycle?

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

Since my first post concerning EPA’s Consent Order, I’ve been reflecting further on the management conditions it imposes – or, more accurately, on what conditions it doesn’t impose.  The Order’s only such conditions address potential worker exposure.  What about the rest of the nanomaterial’s lifecycle? Read More »

Posted in Health policy, Nanotechnology, TSCA reform / Tagged , , | Comments are closed

EPA’s Nano Consent Order, Part I: “Sanitized” Transparency is Still Very Revealing

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

[Part II of this post is available here.]

Word hit the street today that EPA intends to make public a “sanitized” version of a Consent Order it has negotiated with a producer of multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs).  [A link will be provided once available.]  We obtained a copy of the Order, which has redacted all information claimed confidential by the company involved.  What can we learn from this well-scrubbed Order? Read More »

Posted in Health policy, Nanotechnology, TSCA reform / Tagged , , | Comments are closed

The Nano Risk Framework Gets Ready for Shanghai

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 »

Posted in Health policy, International, Nanotechnology / Tagged , , | Read 1 Response

Giving new meaning to the phrase “Insuring the safety of nanomaterials”

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 »

Posted in Health policy, Nanotechnology / Tagged , | Comments are closed

Rebuilding the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s Nano Tool Box

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.

Read More »

Posted in Health policy, Health science, Nanotechnology, TSCA reform / Tagged , , | Comments are closed

Tired of Waiting … [with apologies to Ray Davies]

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 »

Posted in Health policy, Nanotechnology, Regulation / Tagged | Comments are closed