Do you think nanotechnology is dangerous?

A basic definition:

Nanotechnology is the engineering of functional systems at the molecular scale. This covers both current work and concepts that are more advanced.

In its original sense, 'nanotechnology' refers to the projected ability to construct items from the bottom up, using techniques and tools being developed today to make complete, high performance products.

Nanotechnology is a branch of science that deals with particles 1-100 nanometers in size. Experts believe possible dangers of nanotechnology lie in how these tiny particles might interact with the environment, and more importantly, with the human body. Billions of dollars are being spent to incorporate nanoparticles into products that are already being marketed to the public; when this investment is compared to the comparatively scant research into nanotech health issues, some scientists become concerned.

Nanotechnology is sometimes referred to as a general-purpose technology. That's because in its advanced form it will have significant impact on almost all industries and all areas of society. It will offer better built, longer lasting, cleaner, safer, and smarter products for the home, for communications, for medicine, for transportation, for agriculture, and for industry in general.

Nanotechnology offers great potential for benefit to humankind, and also brings severe dangers. While it is appropriate to examine carefully the risks and possible toxicity of nanoparticles and other products of nanoscale technology, the greatest hazards are posed by malicious or unwise use of general-purpose molecular manufacturing.

Some of the dangers described here are existential risks, that is, they may threaten the continued existence of humankind. Others could produce significant disruption but not cause our extinction. A combination of several risks could exacerbate the seriousness of each; any solution must take into account its effect on other risks.

Some of these risks arise from too little regulation and others from too much regulation. Several different kinds of regulation will be necessary in several different fields. An extreme or knee-jerk response to any of these risks will create fertile ground for other risks. The temptation to impose apparently obvious and simple solutions to problems in isolation must be avoided.  Other pages address the possibilities for regulation; this one is concerned with discussing and analyzing the dangers.

Molecular manufacturing raises the possibility of horrifically effective weapons. As an example, the smallest insect is about 200 microns; this creates a plausible size estimate for a nanotech-built antipersonnel weapon capable of seeking and injecting toxin into unprotected humans. The human lethal dose of botulism toxin is about 100 nanograms, or about 1/100 the volume of the weapon. As many as 50 billion toxin-carrying devices—theoretically enough to kill every human on earth—could be packed into a single suitcase. Guns of all sizes would be far more powerful, and their bullets could be self-guided. Aerospace hardware would be far lighter and higher performance; built with minimal or no metal, it would be much harder to spot on radar. Embedded computers would allow remote activation of any weapon, and more compact power handling would allow greatly improved robotics. These ideas barely scratch the surface of what's possible.

Some of these risks arise from too little regulation and others from too much regulation. Several different kinds of regulation will be necessary in several different fields. An extreme or knee-jerk response to any of these risks will simply create fertile ground for other risks. The risks are of several different types, so a single approach (commercial, military, free-information) cannot prevent all of them. Some of the risks are sufficiently extreme that society cannot adjust to the risk while testing various approaches to prevent it. A single grey goo release, or unstable nanotech arms race, is intolerable. Threading a path between all these risks will require careful advance planning.

Some have compared the situation to that of asbestos dust -- another material that was assumed safe until it was learned that it can cause cancer from accumulation in the body. Today 3,000 deaths per year are still attributed to asbestos from decades-old use. Those concerned with possible dangers of nanotechnology wish to avoid a similar or even worse scenario down the road, especially considering the growing market for nanoparticles in such diverse products as car paint, tennis rackets, and make-up.

Regards

Kiran

INFORMATION COLLECTED FROM VARIOUS SOURCES.