18 research outputs found

    Of risks and regulations: how leading U.S. nanoscientists form policy stances about nanotechnology

    Get PDF
    Even though there is a high degree of scientific uncertainty about the risks of nanotechnology, many scholars have argued that policy-making cannot be placed on hold until risk assessments are complete (Faunce, Med J Aust 186(4):189–191, 2007; Kuzma, J Nanopart Res 9(1):165–182, 2007; O’Brien and Cummins, Hum Ecol Risk Assess 14(3):568–592, 2008; Powell et al., Environ Manag 42(3):426–443, 2008). In the absence of risk assessment data, decision makers often rely on scientists’ input about risks and regulation to make policy decisions. The research we present here goes beyond the earlier descriptive studies about nanotechnology regulation to explore the heuristics that the leading U.S. nanoscientists use when they make policy decisions about regulating nanotechnology. In particular, we explore the relationship between nanoscientists’ risk and benefit perceptions and their support for nanotech regulation. We conclude that nanoscientists are more supportive of regulating nanotechnology when they perceive higher levels of risks; yet, their perceived benefits about nanotechnology do not significantly impact their support for nanotech regulation. We also find some gender and disciplinary differences among the nanoscientists. Males are less supportive of nanotech regulation than their female peers and materials scientists are more supportive of nanotechnology regulation than scientists in other fields. Lastly, our findings illustrate that the leading U.S. nanoscientists see the areas of surveillance/privacy, human enhancement, medicine, and environment as the nanotech application areas that are most in need of new regulations

    The ecotoxicology of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: current status, knowledge gaps, challenges, and future needs

    No full text
    This paper introduces a special issue on the ecotoxicology and environmental chemistry of nanoparticles (NPs), and nanomaterials (NMs), in the journal Ecotoxicology. There are many types of NMs and the scientific community is making observations on NP ecotoxicity to inform the wider debate about the risks and benefits of these materials. Natural NPs have existed in the environment since the beginning of Earth’s history, and natural sources can be found in volcanic dust, most natural waters, soils and sediments. Natural NPs are generated by a wide variety of geological and biological processes, and while there is evidence that some natural NPs can be toxic, organisms have also evolved in an environment containing natural NPs. There are concerns that natural nano-scale process could be influenced by the presence of pollution. Manufactured NPs show some complex colloid and aggregation chemistry, which is likely to be affected by particle shape, size, surface area and surface charge, as well as the adsorption properties of the material. Abiotic factors such as pH, ionic strength, water hardness and the presence of organic matter will alter aggregation chemistry; and are expected to influence toxicity. The physico-chemistry is essential to understanding of the fate and behaviour of NPs in the environment, as well as uptake and distribution within organisms, and the interactions of NPs with other pollutants. Data on biological effects show that NPs can be toxic to bacteria, algae, invertebrates and fish species, as well as mammals. However, much of the ecotoxicological data is limited to species used in regulatory testing and freshwater organism. Data on bacteria, terrestrial species, marine species and higher plants is particularly lacking. Detailed investigations of absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME) remain to be performed on species from the major phyla, although there are some data on fish. The environmental risk assessment of NMs could be performed using the existing tiered approach and regulatory framework, but with modifications to methodology including chemical characterisation of the materials being used. There are many challenges ahead, and controversies (e.g., reference substances for ecotoxicology), but knowledge transfer from mammalian toxicology, colloid chemistry, as well as material and geological sciences, will enable ecotoxicology studies to move forward in this new multi-disciplinary field

    Adoption of Internet of Things in Healthcare Organizations

    No full text
    The Internet of things (IoT) is a paradigm that integrates different types of devices which can operate in any environment with their sensing, communicating, and processing capability. This domain has been a revolutionary changing of healthcare operations by providing a new architecture for devices and applications through IP-based connection capability. Furthermore, IoT is a generic platform to exchange information between mobile health devices and other ubiquitous technologies. Although there have been several studies that focus on IoT applications in healthcare, adoption of IoT in healthcare remains largely unknown. The goal of this study is (i) to close the gap in literature by addressing IoT adoption in healthcare; (ii) to help decision-makers to understand the main variables which affect adoption decision among different users in terms of top level managers, healthcare professionals, technical staff, and patients; and (iii) to present recommendations for healthcare managers to improve the adoption process of IoT devices in their organizations. We believe that this study would provide a better understanding of main barriers and facilitators regarding user perspectives during organizational IoT transformation in healthcare
    corecore