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
COMMENTARY OF THE COMMISSION
The Commission emphasizes the importance of precaution in the creation and development
process of medications and therapies with nanotechnology components. Such an approach is an
encouragement to continue to research and document the potentially positive and negative effects
of nanotechnology applications in the health sector to better assess the outcomes for patients and
for the management of the health system in general.
The environment
The Commission’s approach to environmental ethical issues raised by nanotechnology is from a
perspective of sustainable development, including the life cycle approach and the precautionary
principle, which in its view are essential management considerations. The responsibility of individuals
and the community as a whole with regard to the environment, future generations, and quality of life
are some of the values that guided the Commission in its discussions.
The documentation consulted indicates that nanotechnology may have numerous positive impacts on
the environment that could contribute to sustainable development. Certain potential applications will
seek to restore non-viable habitats and ecosystems (proaction), while others will protect the
environment from the potentially harmful effects of human activity (protection, prevention). These
potential benefits of nanotechnology must be encouraged. However, its safety remains to be proven,
and potentially undesirable effects cannot be dismissed out of hand.
In the short run, the biggest source of potential environmental exposure is the use of nanoparticles in
sanitizing contaminated groundwater and soil; concerns have been raised about the impact the high
reactivity of nanoparticles might have on plants, animals, micro-organisms, and ecosystems. 239 This is a
crucial issue because “past experience with human and environmental health suggests that scale is a
relevant factor in determining whether a material will cause harm to a biological system. Inhalation,
absorption, diffusion, and transmission across natural barriers have all proven to be vectors for disease
and biological harm that depend upon scale. The introduction into the human and natural environment
of large numbers of nanoparticles before their biological and dispersion effects are well known does
seem to be a cause for concern.” 240 Data compiled thus far does not give a reliable overview of the
situation. Preliminary studies suggest, however, that certain nanomaterials can damage the organs and
tissues of living organisms. Particularly, concerns have been raised about the toxicity of fullerenes
(C 60 ). 241 A report by the French parliamentary bureau in charge of assessing scientific and technological
choices also mentioned that, although a major factor, “size is only one aspect of the problem for
toxicologists. For example, the biological effects of carbon depend on whether it is in the form of
239 Edna F. EINSIEDEL and Linda GOLDENBERG, “Dwarfing the Social? Nanotechnology Lessons from the
Biotechnology Front,” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, vol. 24, No. 1, February 2004, p. 29 [online]
http://bst.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/24/1/28.
240 Christopher J. PRESTON, op. cit., section 4.1.
241 Tanya SHEETZ et al., “Nanotechnology: Awareness and Societal Concerns,” Technology in Society, August 27,
2005, p. 334.
58 Ethics and Nanotechnology:
A Basis for Action