| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
22 Dec 2004 04:19:26 AM |
| Object: |
Nanotechnology |
Small but deadly
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/story.jsp?story=595304
Nanotechnology, using microscopic particles, may offer huge benefits to
mankind. But let them loose in the human body, studies have found, and
they will wreak havoc
By Christine Evans-Pughe
22 December 2004
In his novel Prey, Michael Crichton portrayed a future threatened by
minuscule, self-replicating robots that begin to consume the planet.
That's still in the realm of science fiction, but not everyone believes
that nanotechnology is inherently safe. The Prince of Wales, for
instance, warned us a year ago that the unleashing of small-scale
"nano" particles on an unprepared world could result in a
Thalidomide-like health disaster.
It is not easy to dismiss such fears over the possible health effects
of nanotechnology - the science of the very small, at the scale of a
billionth of a metre. There may be no evidence of risk, but that does
not mean that the risk is zero. In fact, only now are scientists
beginning to shed some light on exactly how the specially engineered
nanoparticles, which are the basic ingredients of nanotechnology, might
affect our health if they managed to end up in the wider environment.
nano nanotech nanotechnology
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+nano+OR+nanotech+OR+nanotechnology&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+nano+OR+nanotech+OR+nanotechnology&sa=N&tab=nw
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+nano+OR+nanotech+OR+nanotechnology&sa=N&tab=wd&cat=gwd%2FTop
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_oq=nano%20nanotech%20nanotechnology&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
Nano*
http://search.eurekalert.org/e3/query.html?col=ev3rel&qc=ev3rel&qt=Nano*&x=19&y=3
.
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Nanotechnology |
22 Dec 2004 11:58:15 AM |
|
|
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> writes:
Nanotechnology, using microscopic particles, may offer huge benefits to
mankind. But let them loose in the human body, studies have found, and
they will wreak havoc
What a ridiculous article. It starts off with an editor-written
blurb that nanoparticles loosed in the body "will wreak havoc," and then
cites two studies that show that, hey, some chemicals are toxic. The
whole tone of the intro is dishonest about what's being studied and what
the results mean.
Science reporting has really gone down the drain.
Elf
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "jimmicus" |
|
| Title: Re: Nanotechnology |
22 Dec 2004 05:53:11 AM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Small but deadly
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/story.jsp?story=595304
Nanotechnology, using microscopic particles, may offer huge benefits
to
mankind. But let them loose in the human body, studies have found,
and
they will wreak havoc
By Christine Evans-Pughe
22 December 2004
In his novel Prey, Michael Crichton portrayed a future threatened by
minuscule, self-replicating robots that begin to consume the planet.
That's still in the realm of science fiction, but not everyone
believes
that nanotechnology is inherently safe. The Prince of Wales, for
instance, warned us a year ago that the unleashing of small-scale
"nano" particles on an unprepared world could result in a
Thalidomide-like health disaster.
It is not easy to dismiss such fears over the possible health effects
of nanotechnology - the science of the very small, at the scale of a
billionth of a metre. There may be no evidence of risk, but that does
not mean that the risk is zero. In fact, only now are scientists
beginning to shed some light on exactly how the specially engineered
nanoparticles, which are the basic ingredients of nanotechnology,
might
affect our health if they managed to end up in the wider environment.
nano nanotech nanotechnology
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+nano+OR+nanotech+OR+nanotechnology&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+nano+OR+nanotech+OR+nanotechnology&sa=N&tab=nw
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+nano+OR+nanotech+OR+nanotechnology&sa=N&tab=wd&cat=gwd%2FTop
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_oq=nano%20nanotech%20nanotechnology&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
Nano*
http://search.eurekalert.org/e3/query.html?col=ev3rel&qc=ev3rel&qt=Nano*&x=19&y=3
Thing is, life has been living with nano-technology for billions of
years. Many strains of which are rampantly loose in the world and can
kill in just a few hours or days. They're called viruses.
There needs to be some caution exercised of course, but let's not get
carried away here. I would rate viruses & bacteria (both natural and
manufactured), and asteroid impacts as greater threats to our long-term
survival.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
