Tuesday, October 23

Summaries for Nanotechnology and Consumer Products: Introduction (Return to the Topic Agenda)


Topic Summary

Deanna Lekas, Program Associate, Woodrow Wilson Center, welcomed participants to the Consumers Talk Nano web dialogue hosted by the Center's Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, in collaboration with Consumers Union. The international group of approximately 230 participants represented non-governmental organizations, consumers, business/industry, research, education, government, students, science, the media, engineering, and international organizations.

Participants discussed nanotechnology and its current applications, asked questions, and shared thoughts on the benefits and risks of nanotechnology. They posted 143 messages. Highlights of the discussion appear in today's summary.

Panelists

Focus Point Summaries

A Nanotechnology Primer

This first session of the dialogue included an overview discussion of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Panelists and participants were asked to talk about: What is nanotechnology? What are nanomaterials? What makes them different from other materials? How are these materials being used? What are the benefits of this technology, and are there potential risks? We encouraged participants to ask questions and share their interest in this topic.

To begin the dialogue, participants discussed difficulties in defining nanotechnology and how this definition impacts consumer awareness and understanding of nanotechnology. Such difficulties pose challenges in addressing the potential health, safety, and ethical issues relating to nanotechnology. Just as beneficial properties of materials can emerge at the nanoscale, toxicological properties of these nanomaterials also could change depending on differences in the physical and chemical characteristics of materials at this small scale.

It was pointed out that developing a language to talk about nanomaterials is critical—and not easy—since nanotechnology is a broad, complex field of scientific and engineering research. In terms of its application to consumer products, it can be more helpful to talk about specific types of nanomaterials and specific nanotechnology applications.

Regarding what kind of national or international regulations are in place to oversee nanotechnology, it was noted that existing national and international regulations may or may not be effectively applied to nanotechnology production processes and products. Concern was also expressed about how to determine which parameters will best represent potential safety or health hazards for nanoparticles. On this point, it was noted that last December, Berkeley, California put in place the first nano-specific ordinance for nanotechnology based on the city’s community-right-to-know law. Other comments addressed identifying the common characteristics of nanomaterials that could be used to predict toxic potential or determine which characteristics may make nanomaterials less of a priority for testing.

Go to this Discussion


Consumer Product Applications: Benefits and Risks

Over 575 consumer products with nanotechnology claims are already on the market. This topic involved a discussion on existing and potential consumer products containing nanomaterials. Panelists and participants explored the various benefits and uses of nanotechnology, the most commonly used nanomaterials, and new developments that may be on the horizon. The discussion also addressed issues of risk (e.g., are there risks, and what are they?).

Have You Used Them? Participants were invited to share their experiences with nanoproducts. Where have you seen these products? Have you purchased any? Why or why not? To what extent do you pay attention to labels? What factors do or would influence your decision to purchase or use a nanoproduct?

In past public opinion polls, the question of what government and industry could do to increase consumer confidence in nanotechnology-based products has generated three consistent responses: (1) Disclosure and transparency (for example, product labeling and information about how companies are using nanotechnology), (2) Pre-market testing (for example, rigorous product testing before going to market), and (3) Third-party testing (for example, an independent certifying agency or an environmental or consumer group working with industry). A thoughtful discussion of the pros and cons of this approach ranged from pre-market approval to concerns related to legal, scientific, and commercial issues. The question of how much government and industry want to pay attention to public concerns was posed, particularly given that nanotechnology is a growing global enterprise that will have large economic and social impacts across a wide variety of countries with varying attitudes toward new technologies.

Safety testing of nanotechnology ingredients in cosmetics and food products also emerged as a key issue. How or if nanomaterials differ in their toxicity from their larger-sized counterparts is not always known. One suggestion was made to incorporate materials-testing strategies early in the research and development of new nanotechnologies. Because nanotechnology allows the ability to alter the chemistry of materials very precisely, toxicity could be "designed out" of products.

The issue of testing nanomaterials generated considerable discussion including, for example, what would happen if test data indicate problems with specific nanomaterials in consumer products or cosmetics already on the market. While academic research on nanomaterials and human health remains uncoordinated, it has been shown that some nanomaterials do have the potential to behave differently than larger materials inside the body. Some suggestions regarding testing included consolidating data and research on how nanomaterials interact with biological systems; defining well characterized materials during testing; establishing testing protocols and standard reference materials; coordinating what research is being funded by government agencies; and addressing the need for environmental research.

Concern was raised from an industry perspective cautioning against regulation, nano-specific legislation, and labeling that would result in no correlated public benefit. One suggestion was that rather than regulating every nanotechnology product on the market, perhaps existing regulations could be adapted to make sure materials of concern receive appropriate scrutiny and oversight. Referencing the Aesop fable, “Belling the Cat,” it was noted that, at present, creating regulations would be a difficult process, but that individual consumers also cannot require a company to make sure that their products are safe without some government intervention. Given these constraints, participants suggested that industry, non-government, and academic organizations must work with government researchers and regulatory agencies to develop standards to ensure safe and responsible nanotechnologies.

Go to this Discussion


Product Labeling

During Day 1 of the dialogue, a number of labeling questions and comments arose during the other two discussions. Thus the discussion threads related to labeling of nanoproducts were pulled into this separate focus point discussion for easier navigation and participation.

Should manufacturers disclose the nano-sized ingredients in their products on labels? How do labels affect your perception of products in both positive and negative ways?

Many posts discussed the issue of labeling nano products. Consumers voiced an opinion that they have a right to know what they are purchasing and need sufficient information on labels to make informed decisions. Participants suggested various attributes and contents to include on product labels emphasizing the importance of such things as: simplicity, conciseness, certainty; honesty; clear, conspicuous labeling; an ingredients list; indication of risk; safety testing information; indication of size; toxicity information; and chemical makeup and physical structure of nanomaterials. Panelists also discussed different reasons why consumers want ingredient labeling, which could range from safety to ethical reasons. The theme of defining "nano" was repeated throughout the discussion. It was noted that we need a definition of "nano" before we can label products. Some emphasized the importance of labeling ingredients that are engineered to be present at the nanoscale and deliberately added to products.

Some business participants raised concerns about naturally occurring nanomaterials and the complexities they might bring to labeling requirements. Some questioned whether labeling should only be required when substances are proven harmful, with several people noting historical problems with that approach. According to one industry authority, there is no clear reason to label nanomaterials today.

Concerns were also expressed about falsely labeling products as containing nanoparticles when they do not. Some expressed interest in seeing more discussion on the topic of labeling to address how, when, where, and why labels for nanotechnology should be used.

Go to this Discussion


Summarizer Statement

While these summaries contain highlights from participants' contributions, far more comprehensive information is available in the individual messages.

Thanks to all the enthusiastic participants!

Sally Hedman