'Nano Divide' No Small Matter

'Nano Divide' No Small Matter
Stephen Leahy - IPS 1/31/04

BROOKLIN, Canada, Jan 31 (IPS) - Research in nanotechnology is thriving in developing countries but high-profile criticism of the new process from the likes of Prince Charles and Greenpeace will hurt investment, and threatens to create a "nano divide" between rich and poor countries, says a new report.

Despite its fantastic sounding name, the technology is actually very practical for developing countries, where existing methods of treating sanitation, for example, do not actually work well or are very expensive, says Abdallah Daar, from the University of Toronto's Joint Centre for Bioethics.

"Nanotechnology could be better and cheaper, as well as being a profitable industry for countries in the South," said Daar, one of the co-authors of the report published in the UK journal 'Nanotechnology'.

Nanotechnology refers to the manipulation of matter at the level of atoms and molecules. Where biotechnology involves manipulating genes, the basic units of the genetic code, nanotechnology could potentially use atoms to build a gene.

It is a highly diverse field that includes the semi-fantastic -¡ fleets of cancer fighting ''nano robots'' and super computers that fit on the head of a pin. But already there are products in the marketplace, like sunscreens, cosmetics and stain-proof pants, which use nano-sized titanium dioxide particles.

Over the past four years, the United States has invested several billion dollars to develop the technology. The market for nano products and services is predicted to reach one trillion dollars by 2015, according to the U.S. National Science Foundation.

Countries like China, India and South Korea have well-established nano research centres and commercial products on the market. Thailand, Philippines, South Africa, Brazil and Chile are not far behind, with their governments funding the new technology.

These countries and others like Mexico and Argentina do not want to be importers of this technology, or just observers, Daar told IPS.

"They want to stay ahead of the curve. They don't want to just export bananas and T-shirts."

China is testing a nanotech bone scaffold in 26 patients. Built of ''nano particles'', such scaffolds are very strong and highly porous, allowing tissue and blood vessels to attach easily. Their many medical uses include bone growth and bone repair.

India plans to use quantum dots in a fast, low-cost diagnostic tool for treating tuberculosis (TB).

The nano-sized semiconductor crystals fluoresce or glow when irradiated. Attaching dots of different sizes to different molecules transforms then into markers that reveal what is happening inside the body. The resulting test would be faster, less expensive and use less blood than current methods.

India is also commercialising a U.S.-patented "nano particle" drug delivery system, while Brazil hopes its "nano magnets" can be used to clean up oil spills.

But if calls for a moratorium on nano products by Greenpeace and Canada's ETC Group are heeded, it could mean the end for nano in the South.

"There are very limited sources of funding there, and if people get frightened, the funding will stop," says Daar.

"Just because 'nano materials' are small doesn't mean they're safe," says Pat Mooney, ETC's executive director. In 2002 the group began a campaign to ban commercial production of new products from nanotechnology until more research is done on the risks.

Mooney agrees nanotech could be highly beneficial to the South, and that its potential should be explored. Some of the research he knows of could dramatically reduce the costs of water purification and solar cells.

But first, standards for health and environmental safety have to be established.

"There aren't even agreed on safety protocols for working with this stuff in the lab," Mooney told IPS.

Because they are so small, nanotech materials have unique, and often unknown, chemical, physical and electrical properties. That gives them as yet unknown potential uses, as well as risks.

''Nano particles" are small enough to cross cell walls, leak into intracellular spaces, and some are bioactive, according to research done at the Centre for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN) at Rice University in Houston, in the U.S. state of Texas.

CBEN is the only U.S. research group looking at what happens when products of the nano industry get into the environment. It started its work in 2002.

Regulatory agencies in the United States and Europe have begun looking at the issue and to fund research. In the next few weeks, new studies will be released saying some nanoparticles do pose a danger, says Mooney.

Daar and his co-authors acknowledge that nanotech could pose some risks. But they worry activists' ''fear-mongering'' will result in a debate raging over the risks to the North, while any potential benefits to people in the South will be ignored.

The report says that has been the outcome of the debate over the safety of genetically modified (GM) food. "We want to avoid those mistakes this time," it adds.

The authors propose a new international network to assess the technology's risks and its benefits for developed and developing nations. Such a network could also serve as a focal point for research, help create regulatory regimes and provide a forum for all stakeholders.

Mooney's group is thinking along the same lines, and plans to make a formal proposal for an international convention on the evaluation of new technologies at the Convention on Biological Diversity in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia in February.

This new body would track, evaluate and accept or reject new technologies and their products. It would include participation from all sectors, initiate research, provide early warnings, encourage transfer of technology and diversity and more.

It would not just be for nanotech, but a way to cope with all new major technologies, Mooney says.