Yep, liberals want to rein in nanotechnology for what are essentially ethical concerns. This is the very same technology that may provide cures for heart disease, cancer, etc. Cuts both ways folks, except libs' ethics always seem to be roused when it affects them.

I haven't heard Christopher Reeves on this bandwagon, promoting nano-tech...although it could be a cure for him too.


Ultra-Small Nanotechnology Needs Regulation-Report

21 minutes ago

By Patricia Reaney

LONDON (Reuters) - Nanotechnology -- which operates on an almost unimaginably small scale -- offers tremendous potential, but regulation is needed to minimize any future risks, scientists said on Thursday.


The atom-sized technology could lead to more powerful computers, very light but strong materials and advanced medical techniques.


But a report by the Britain's Royal Society, an academy of leading scientists, and the Royal Academy of Engineering, said more research is needed to discover any negative, as well as positive effects, it may have.


Prophets of doom have painted a nightmare scenario of self-replicating robots turning the Earth into a "gray goo."


Fears have also been raised of a risk in breathing in designer materials so small that they can slip through membranes inside the body.


"Most nanotechnologies pose no new risks to health safety or the environment, but we believe research and regulation is required immediately to address uncertainties about the effects of manufactured nanoparticles and nanotubes," Professor Ann Dowling, of the University of Cambridge, told a news conference.


Nanoparticles and nanotubes are ultra small pieces of material. The technology is already being used in cosmetics, computer chips, sunscreens, self-cleaning windows and stain-resistant clothing.


But Dowling, head of the working group that produced the report, said there are gaps in regulation and that researchers are concerned about the potential impact of manufactured nanoparticles.


TESTING AND REGULATION


Nanotechnology has fascinated scientists with its possibilities and also inspired fears about its dangers. Britain's Prince Charles recently voiced his concerns about the new technology and called for a greater openness on the part of its proponents.


Dowling said some of the benefits and the risks have been "over-hyped" which does a disservice to the technology.


Professor Richard Jones, of the University of Sheffield, said the report shows a surprising consensus between the scientific community and environmentalists.


"Debate now needs to move on to some bigger, longer term, questions," he said in a statement. "How we can use nanotechnology to overcome the world's pressing environmental and health problems while staying alert for the new ethical issues that such a powerful technology will potentially raise?"


The report, commissioned by the government, suggested that nanoparticles and nanotubes be treated as new chemicals under UK and European legislation because they have different properties from the same chemical in larger form.


It also called for exposure limits in the workplace and said nanoparticles should be approved by an independent scientific safety committee before they are used in consumer products such as cosmetics.