A Basis for Action - Commission de l'éthique de la science et de la ...

Position Statement of the Commission de l'éthique de la science et de la technologie
features of nanotechnology-derived products (the Commission raised this question before with regard
to transgenesis-derived products in a position statement on genetically modified organisms 109 )?
However, such products are already on the market—the Woodrow Wilson Center database recorded
over 200 in winter 2006 110 —and more will be added with advances in research.
An example from the cosmetics industry leads the Commission to question changes in the properties
of titanium dioxide (TiO 2 ), a chemical already used in sun creams that becomes transparent at the
nanoscale and penetrates the skin more easily. Use of titanium dioxide in sun creams is nothing new,
but the use of nanoparticles is. Can current control agency requirements for new or transformed
products address changes of this nature in the preparation of a consumer product already available on
the market without nanometric components? Given that the passage of matter to the nanoscale can
create changes in terms of both exposure (including the fate, persistence, and bioaccumulation of
products in the environment or in living organisms) and the nature or intensity of possible adverse
effects, 111 how suitable are current assessment methods for nanotechnology-derived products and their
impact on health and the environment?
Lastly, the Commission notes that the effects of nanoparticles on health and the environment have
been studied very little in the laboratory to date, particularly on humans, and the few research results
obtained are sometimes contradictory and difficult to reproduce. Some believe that current equipment
for measuring exposure to free nanoparticles is inadequate, as are assessment methods for determining
the environmental fate of nanoparticles. 112 This being the case, the Commission would note the
following issues considered crucial to assessing the risks associated with engineered nanoparticles, as
proposed following a consultation by leading U.S. organizations 113 :
• Assessment of degree of exposure
• Toxicity
• The ability to extrapolate nanoparticle toxicity using non-nanometric particle and fiber toxicity
databases
109 COMMISSION DE L’ÉTHIQUE DE LA SCIENCE ET DE LA TECHNOLOGIE, Pour une gestion éthique des OGM, [For the
Ethical Management of GMOs] Gouvernement du Québec, 2003; see, among others, p. 31 to 42 (in French)
For an English summary of this position statement, see www.ethique.gouv.qc.ca/eng/ftp/
CESTAvisOGMEnglish.pdf.
110 WOODROW WILSON CENTER FOR SCHOLARS, “A Nanotechnology Consumer Products Inventory” [online]
http://www.nanotechproject.org/index.php?id=44. Due to the collection method used—an Internet search
for websites advertising products with nanotechnology-derived components—this list is incomplete, and the
number of products in circulation is probably higher.
111 SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON EMERGING AND NEWLY IDENTIFIED HEALTH RISKS (SCENIHR), op. cit., p. 54.
112 Ibid., p. 4.
113 Results of a workshop organized by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) cited in Kevin L. DREHER, “Toxicological Highlight. Health and Environmental
Impact of Nanotechnology: Toxicological Assessment of Manufactured Nanoparticles,” Toxicological Sciences,
Vol. 77, No. 1, 2004 [online] http://171.66.120.171/cgi/content/full/77/1/3. See also Wolfgang LUTHER
(dir.), Industrial Application of Nanomaterials: Chances and Risks, Technological Analysis, with the support of the
European Commission, August 2004 [online] http://www.vdi.de/vdi/organisation/schnellauswahl/
techno/arbeitsgebiete/zukunft/sub/10803/index.php.
30 Ethics and Nanotechnology:
A Basis for Action