Nanoparticulate materials and regulatory policy in Europe: An analysis of stakeholder perspectives

The novel properties of nanoparticulate materials (NPM) and the rapid development of NPM based products have raised many unanswered questions and concerns by different stakeholders over its consequences for the environment and human health. These concerns have led to an increasing discussion in both the US and Europe about possible regulatory policies for NPM. In this article a comparative study of stakeholders' perceptions on regulatory policy issues with NPM in Europe is presented. It was found that industry wants to regulate this area if the scientific evidence demonstrates that NPM are harmful, but also that the regulatory bodies do not find it necessary at this point of time to regulate until scientific evidence demonstrates that NPM are harmful. This research therefore shows that there will most likely not be any regulatory interventions until there is an established and convincing scientific knowledge base demonstrating that NPM can be hazardous. It is furthermore discussed in this article the different roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders in financing the research required to establish the necessary level of fundamental scientific evidence. It was also found that the activity of the regulatory bodies on this issue differ between the European countrie

Reviewing the environmental and human health knowledge base of carbon nanotubes.

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are considered one of the most promising materials in nanotechnology, with attractive properties for many technologic applications. The different synthesis, purification, and postprocessing methods produce CNTs with different physical characteristics, which can be applied in different fields ranging from composite materials, medical applications, and electronics to energy storage. The widespread projected use of CNTs makes it important to understand their potential harmful effects. In this environmental health review we observed a remarkable range of results of some of the toxicology studies. The comparability should be improved by further standardization and introduction of reference materials. However, at present the findings of this review suggest several key points: a) there are different types of CNTs, and therefore they cannot be considered a uniform group of substances; and b) in environmental compartments, CNTs can be bioavailable to organisms. The properties of CNTs suggest a possible accumulation along the food chain and high persistence. In organisms the absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity of CNTs depend on the inherent physical and chemical characteristics such as CNT functionalization, coating, length, and agglomeration state that are influenced by the external environmental conditions during CNT production, use, and disposal stages. Characterized exposure scenarios could therefore be useful when conducting toxicologic studies. However, CNTs produce a toxic response upon reaching the lungs in sufficient quantity; this reaction is produced in a time-and dose-dependent manner. The identification of possible risks to human health and environment is a prerequisite for a successful introduction of CNTs in future applications

Nanoparticles: A Closer Look at the Risks to Human Health and the Environment Perceptions and Precautionary Measures of Industry and Regulatory Bodies in Europe

Nanotechnology is a collective definition referring to every technology and science which operates on a nanoscale. Nanoparticles have different properties than larger particles and these properties can be utilized in a wide spectre of areas such as in medicine, information technologies, energy production and storage, materials, manufacturing and environmental applications. Although nano-derived applications have great potentials, there are some concerns about the potential nanoparticles have to cause adverse effects on human health and the environment. The different properties that make nanoparticles so promising are at the same time properties that are likely to have impact on ecosystems and organisms. This research maps out the current knowledge base of hazards and risks of nanoparticles to human health and the environment. Furthermore it investigates the perceptions that producers and regulatory bodies have of the risks and looks at the precautionary measures taken. The main findings of this study are that nanoparticles cause more toxic effects in the lungs than bigger particles and can translocate within the environment and the body. However, nanoparticles are likely to cause different impacts to human health, occupation health and the environment, depending on the size, shape and chemical composition of the nanoparticle. There is therefore great uncertainty about what the actual risks of nanoparticle to human health and the environment are. Both industry and regulatory bodies are aware of the potential risks of nanoparticles. The producers do not believe that nanoparticles represent a risk to the environment, but sees that nanoparticles can be more problematic in occupational settings. Producers therefore apply some precautionary measures to protect their workers, but not for the protection of public health or environment. The issue of nanoparticles have a low priority among the regulatory bodies at the moment. The regulators are waiting for more scientific evidence and are therefore not taking any direct precautionary measures

Nanoparticulate materials and regulatory policy in Europe: An analysis of stakeholder perspectives

The novel properties of nanoparticulate materials (NPM) and the rapid development of NPM based products have raised many unanswered questions and concerns by different stakeholders over its consequences for the environment and human health. These concerns have led to an increasing discussion in both the US and Europe about possible regulatory policies for NPM. In this article a comparative study of stakeholders' perceptions on regulatory policy issues with NPM in Europe is presented. It was found that industry wants to regulate this area if the scientific evidence demonstrates that NPM are harmful, but also that the regulatory bodies do not find it necessary at this point of time to regulate until scientific evidence demonstrates that NPM are harmful. This research therefore shows that there will most likely not be any regulatory interventions until there is an established and convincing scientific knowledge base demonstrating that NPM can be hazardous. It is furthermore discussed in this article the different roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders in financing the research required to establish the necessary level of fundamental scientific evidence. It was also found that the activity of the regulatory bodies on this issue differ between the European countries