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
nanomaterials. 216 Some companies are very active in developing guidelines to keep the undesirable
effects of nanotechnology to a minimum. For example, in 2005, the Virginia firm Luna Innovations
implemented a management program called NanoSAFE aimed at the following five objectives: 217
• Regularly monitor worker health in order to quickly detect potential harmful effects of occupational
activities
• Implement mechanisms to check workplace safety (specifically by installing sensors that can measure
the presence and rate of nanoparticles, but also basic safety measures like wearing long gloves or
sleeves that sufficiently cover wrists to avoid all exposure to the skin)
• Carry out toxicological studies
• Conduct studies on the possible environmental impact
• Assure strategic management of the workplace and products, notably in order to prevent
nanoparticle emissions into the environment.
Protecting the public
The Commission stresses that protecting the public is a fundamental value to uphold when marketing
any kind of nanotechnology-derived consumer product. It also believes that companies are responsible
for the products they release, for ensuring said products are in no way harmful, and for keeping the
decision-making process transparent.
As the promoters themselves have observed, public acceptance of new nanotechnology-derived
products is a prerequisite for sector growth. This observation stems from hard-earned experience in
other emerging high tech fields (genetically modified organisms are a prime example of this). 218
Products and services derived from nanotechnology will only be accepted if the public has faith in
them and in the companies developing them. Two factors will play a role in determining the public’s
level of trust: conviction that the safety of the products and services on the market has clearly been
demonstrated—in other words, confidence that the public is sufficiently protected against the possible
harmful effects—and the transparency of authorities (government, industrial, or others) involved in the
monitoring process. This latter factor will be discussed further on.
Confidence in the safety of nanotechnology-derived products is a major concern for the Commission.
As mentioned above, there is an increasing number of these products, and some are already available
on the market as consumer products: certain cosmetics (foundations, lipsticks, sun creams, anti-wrinkle
creams, etc.), various health products (vitamin supplements, diet products), cleaning and maintenance
216 NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH – NIOSH (United States), Position Statement
on Nanotechnology: Advancing Research on Occupational Health Implications and Applications (undated) [online]
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/nanotech/position.html.
217 Josh CABLE, “A Best Practices Approach to Minimizing EHS Risk in Nanotechnology Manufacturing,”
Occupational Hazards, October 6, 2005 [online] http://www.occupationalhazards.com/safety_zones/
42/article.php?id=14129.
218 John BALDUS et al., “Getting Nanotechnology Right the First Time,” Issues in Science and Technology, vol. XXI,
No. 4, Summer 2005, p. 67 [online] http://www.issues.org/21.4/balbus.html.
52 Ethics and Nanotechnology:
A Basis for Action