Search

Silver nanoparticles are actually used in several industrial sectors and end up in the environment, thus inducing a possible toxicity for living organisms. This article reviews the properties, synthesis and toxicology of silver nanoparticles, with focus on the toxicity for insects such as Bombyx mori. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The promise of nanotechnology has captivated academia, industry, the general public, and governments around the world. Nanotechnology, the ability to control and manipulate matter at the nanoscale, is an enabling technology which combines biology, physics, chemistry, and information technology in an emerging field of science that might be able to transform society as we know it today. Nanotechnology offers a range of possible solutions for a whole array of social, environmental, and economic challenges, yet much uncertainty remains about the consequences of the use of nanotechnology and nanomaterials over a longer period of time. Many governments around the world have responded to the potentially revolutionary nature of nanotechnology, yet in very different ways. This leads to questions why governments take a different approach to a similar opportunity and a similar challenge. This paper reflects on drivers of science and technology policies, in particular with regard to nanotechnology. It compares the approach of the government of the Netherlands-a smaller, highly developed country in the heart of the European Union-with the be approach of the American government. As a first in the world, the US Congress established a national program to support research and development in nanotechnology: the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) in 2001. The NNI is an overarching program which coordinates all efforts in nanotechnology research and development made by the 26 participating federal departments and agencies. That American approach is the benchmark in this study. The comparison of the NNI with the Dutch government approach adds to our understanding which factors drive science and technology policies, why certain factors are important, under which circumstances their weight changes, and how the international setting shapes domestic science and technology policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nanotechnology is viewed by those in favor of its development in two different ways, and the divide is not recent. This article describes the origins of the differing visions of nanotechnology and examines their broader impacts. The typical history of the field tells nothing about these differing visions, which perhaps misleads. At least two distinct camps among scientists and engineers pursue work on the nanoscale, but they rarely interact, and when they do, they get nowhere. This article looks first at definitional issues in the field; then turns to the common history of nanotechnology, the history's shortcomings, and one particular episode that highlights the divide; and then examines the broader impacts of this dispute. The divide among those interested in nanotech tells something about the way different groups of people see technology and the application of science. This historical review clarifies controversy over societal issues and terminology in nanotechnology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The central claims defended in this article are the following: (a) The social and ethical challenges of nano- technology can be frilly identified only if both the characteristic features of nanotechnologies and the social contexts into which they are emerging are considered. (b) When this is done, a host of significant social context issues, or issues that arise as a result of problematic features of the social contexts into which nanotechnology is emerging, become salient. (c) These issues can only be addressed by remedying the problematic features of the social contexts, which cannot be accomplished by technology design or risk management alone. (d) The US. National Nanotechnology Initiative's conceptualization and operationalization of responsible development does not adequately recognize the significance of social context issues to responsible development. (e) Therefore, the National Nanotechnology Initiative is not yet comprehensive and needs to be expanded with respect to identifying and addressing social context issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Big pharma's business model, which relies on a few blockbusters to generate profits, is clearly broken. Patent expiration on numerous blockbusters in recent years is already altering the drug landscape. Drug companies are also facing other challenges that necessitate development and implementation of novel R&D strategies, including those that focus on nanotechnology and miniaturization. Clearly, there is enormous excitement and expectation regarding nanomedicine's potential impact. However, securing valid and defensible patent protection will be critical. Although early forecasts for nanomedicine commercialization are encouraging, there are numerous bottlenecks as well. One of the major hurdles is an emerging thicket of patent claims, resulting primarily from patent proliferation as well as continued issuance of surprisingly broad patents by the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). Adding to this confusion is the fact that the US National Nanotechnology Initiative's widely cited definition of nanotechnology is inaccurate and irrelevant from a nanomedicine perspective. It is also the cause of the inadequate patent classification system that was recently unveiled by the PTO. All of this is creating a chaotic, tangled patent landscape in various sectors of nanomedicine where the competing players are unsure of the validity and enforceability of numerous issued patents. If this trend continues, it could stifle competition and limit access to some inventions. Therefore, reforms are urgently needed at the PTO to address problems ranging from poor patent quality and questionable examination practices to inadequate search capabilities, rising attrition, poor employee morale and a skyrocketing patent application backlog. Only a robust patent system will stimulate the development of commercially viable nanomedicine products that can drastically improve a patient's quality of life and reduce healthcare costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]