Responsible nanotechnology development

  • Gianluigi Forloni
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Technology Transfer and Commercialization of Nanotechnology


Nanotechnologies have an increasing relevance in our life, numerous products already on the market are associated with this new technology. Although the chemical constituents of nanomaterials are often well known, the properties at the nano level are completely different from the bulk materials. Independently from the specific application the knowledge in this field involves different type of scientific competence. The accountability of the nanomaterial research imply the parallel development of innovative methodological approaches to assess and manage the risks associated to the exposure for humans and environmental to the nanomaterials for their entire life-cycle: production, application, use and waste discharge. The vast numbers of applications and the enormous amount of variables influencing the characteristics of the nanomaterials make particularly difficult the elaboration of appropriate nanotoxicological protocols. According to the official declarations exist an awareness of the public institutions in charge of the regulatory system, about the environmental, health and safety implications of nanotechnology, but the scientific information is insufficient to support appropriate mandatory rules. Public research programmers must play an important role in providing greater incentives and encouragement for nanotechnologies that support sustainable development to avoid endangering humanity’s well being in the long-term. The existing imbalance in funds allocated to nanotech research needs to be corrected so that impact assessment and minimization and not only application come high in the agenda. Research funding should consider as a priority the elimination of knowledge gaps instead of promoting technological application only. With the creation of a public register collecting nanomaterials and new applications it is possible, starting from the information available, initiate a sustainable route, allowing the gradual development of a rational and informed approach to the nanotoxicology. The establishment of an effective strategy cannot ignore the distinction between different nanoparticles on their use and the type of exposure to which we are subjected. Categorization is essential to orchestrate toxicological rules realistic and effective. The responsible development of nanotechnology means a common effort, by scientists, producers, stakeholders, and public institutions to develop appropriate programs to systematically approach the complex issue of the nanotoxicology.


Health Nanotoxicology Environment Risk assessment Social responsibility 


  1. Bosi S, Da Ros T, Spalluto G, Prato M (2003) Fullerene derivatives: an attractive tool for biological applications. Eur J Med Chem 38:913–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bottini M, Rosato N, Gloria F, Adanti S, Corradino N, Bergamaschi A, Magrini A (2011) Public optimism towards nanomedicine. Int J Nanomed 6:3473–3485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burgess P, Hutt PB, Farokhzad OC, Langer R, Minick S, Zale S (2010) On firm ground: IP protection of therapeutic nanoparticles. Nat Biotechnol 28:1267–1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cattaneo AG, Gornati R, Sabbioni E, Chiriva-Internati M, Cobos E, Jenkins MR, Bernardini G (2010) Nanotechnology and human health: risks and benefits. J Appl Toxicol 30:730–744. doi: 10.1002/jat.1609 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Choi J-Y, Ramachandran G, Kandlikar M (2009) The impact of toxicity testing costs on nanomaterial regulation. Environ Sci Technol 43:3030–3034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cormick C (2012) The complexity of public engagement. Nat Nanotechnol 7:77–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Durdagi S, Mavromoustakos T, Papadopoulos MG (2008) 3D QSAR CoMFA/CoMSIA, molecular docking and molecular dynamics studies of fullerene-based HIV-1 PR inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 18:6283–6289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Durdagi S, Supuran CT, Strom TA, Doostdar N, Kumar MK, Barron AR, Mavromoustakos T, Papadopoulos MG (2009) In silico drug screening approach for the design of magic bullets: a successful example with anti-HIV fullerene derivatized amino acids. J Chem Inf Model 49:1139–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dusinska M, Dusinska M, Fjellsbø L, Magdolenova Z, Rinna A, Runden Pran E, Bartonova A, Heimstad E, Harju M, Tran L, Ross B, Juillerat L, Halamoda Kenzaui B, Marano F, Boland S, Guadaginini R, Saunders M, Cartwright L, Carreira S, Whelan M, Kelin Ch, Worth A, Palosaari T, Burello E, Housiadas C, Pilou M, Volkovova K, Tulinska J, Kazimirova A, Barancokova M, Sebekova K, Hurbankova M, Kovacikova Z, Knudsen L, Poulsen M, Mose T, Vilà M, Gombau L, Fernandez B, Castell J, Marcomini A, Pojana G, Bilanicova D, Vallotto D (2009) Testing strategies for the safety of nanoparticles used in medical applications. Nanomedicine (Lond) 4:605–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. EPA (2007) Nanotechnology White Paper EPA 100/B-07/001, Feb 2007.
  11. EPA (2009) Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Programme.
  12. European Commission (2004) European Commission, community health and consumer protection. Nanotechnologies: a preliminary risk analysis on the basis of a workshop organized in Brussels on 1–2 March 2004 by the health and consumer protection Directorate General of the European Commission.
  13. European NanoSafe Report (2004) Technical analysis: industrial application of nanomaterials chances and risks.
  14. Fadeel B, Garcia-Bennett AE (2010) Better safe than sorry: understanding the toxicological properties of inorganic nanoparticles manufactured for biomedical applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 62:362–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fiorino DJ (2010) Voluntary initiative, regulation, and nanotechnology oversight: charting a path. Project in Emerging Nanotechnology PEN 19Google Scholar
  16. Foss Hansen S, Larsen BH, Olsen SI, Baun A (2007) Categorization framework to aid hazard identification of nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 1:243–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foss Hansen S, Maynard A, Baun A, Tickner JA (2008) Late lessons from early warnings for nanotechnology. Nat Nanotechnol 3:444–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garcia-Bennett A, Nees M, Fadeel B (2011) In search of the Holy Grail: folate-targeted nanoparticles for cancer therapy. Biochem Pharmacol 81:976–984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gee D (2009) Late lessons from early warnings: towards realism and precaution with EMF? Pathophysiology 16:217–231 Google Scholar
  20. Kahan DM, Braman D, Slovic P, Gastil J, Cohen G (2009) Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nat Nanotechnol 4:87–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kane AB, Hurt RH (2008) Nanotoxicology: the asbestos analogy revisited. Nat Nanotechnol 3:378–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Linkov I, Steevens J, Adlakha-Hutcheon G, Bennett E, Chappell M, Colvin V, Davis JM, Davis T, Elder A, Foss Hansen S, Hakkinen PB, Hussain SM, Karkan D, Korenstein R, Lynch I, Metcalfe C, Ramadan AB, Satterstrom FK (2009) Emerging methods and tools for environmental risk assessment, decision-making, and policy for nanomaterials: summary of NATO Advanced Research Workshop. J Nanopart Res 1:513–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu W, Wu Y, Wang C, Li HC, Wang T, Liao CY, Cui L, Zhou QF, Yan B, Jiang GB (2010) Impact of silver nanoparticles on human cells: effect of particle size. Nanotoxicology 4:319–330Google Scholar
  24. Lorenz C, Von Goetz N, Scheringer M, Wormuth M, Hungerbühler K (2011) Potential exposure of German consumers to engineered nanoparticles in cosmetics and personal care products. Nanotoxicology 5:12–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lövestam G, Rauscher H, Roebben G, Sokull Klüttgen B, Gibson N, Putaud J-P, Stamm H (2010) Considerations on a definition of nanomaterial for regulatory purposes EUR 24403 EN, European Commission Joint Research Centre.
  26. Ma Y (2009) In vitro models for nanotoxicity testing. In: Sahu SC, Casciano DA (eds) Nanotoxicity. Wiley, New York, pp 349–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maurer-Jones MA, Lin Y-S, Haynes CL (2010) Functional assessment of metal oxide nanoparticle toxicity in immune cells. ACS Nano 4:3363–3373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maynard AD (2011) Don’t define nanomaterials. Nature 475(7354):31. doi: 10.1038/475031a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Maynard AD, Aitken RJ, Butz T, Colvin V, Donaldson K, Oberdörster G, Philbert MA, Ryan J, Seaton A, Stone V, Tinkle SS, Tran L, Walker NJ, Warheit DB (2006) Safe handling of nanotechnology. Nature 444:267–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McCall M (2011) Nanoparticles in the real world. Nat Nanotechnol 6:613–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Menjoge AR, Kannan RM, Tomalia DA (2010) Dendrimer-based drug and imaging conjugates: design considerations for nanomedical applications. Drug Discov Today 15:171–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Moore MN (2006) Do nanoparticles present ecotoxicological risks for the health of the aquatic environment? Environ Int 32:967–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morimoto Y, Hirohashi M, Ogami A, Oyabu T, Myojo T, Todoroki M, Yamamoto M, Hashiba M, Mizuguchi Y, Lee BW, Kuroda E, Shimada M, Wang WN, Yamamoto K, Fujita K, Endoh S, Uchida K, Kobayashi N, Mizuno K, Inada M, Tao H, Nakazato T, Nakanishi J, Tanaka I (2011) Pulmonary toxicity of well-dispersed multi-wall carbon nanotubes following inhalation and intratracheal instillation. Nanotoxicology (in press)Google Scholar
  34. Morris J, Willis J, De Martinis D, Hansen B, Laursen H, Sintes JR, Kearns P, Gonzalez M (2011) Science policy considerations for responsible nanotechnology decisions. Nat Nanotechnol 6:73–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Murphy FA, Poland CA, Duffin R, Al-Jamal KT, Ali-Boucetta H, Nunes A, Byrne F, Prina-Mello A, Volkov Y, Li S, Mather SJ, Bianco A, Prato M, Macnee W, Wallace WA, Kostarelos K, Donaldson K (2011) Length-dependent retention of carbon nanotubes in the pleural space of mice initiates sustained inflammation and progressive fibrosis on the parietal pleura. Am J Pathol 178:2587–2600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nel A, Xia T, Mädler L, Li N (2006) Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science 311:622–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nijhara R, Balakrishnan K (2006) Bringing nanomedicines to market: regulatory challenges, opportunities, and uncertainties. Nanomedicine 2:127–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oberdörster G, Oberdörster E, Oberdörster J (2005) Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environ Health Perspect 113:823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ponce De Castillo AM (2011) Nano governance: how should the EU implement nanomaterial traceability? ETUI Police Brief 2:1–4Google Scholar
  40. Powers KV, Palazuelos M, Brown SC, Roberts SM (2009) Characterization of nanomaterials for toxicological evaluation. In: Sahu SC, Casciano DA (eds) Nanotoxicity. Wiley, New York, pp 1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Proceedings Conference NanoCap/STOA-EP (2009) Working and Living with Nanotechnologies—Trade Union and NGO positions.
  42. Puzyn T, Rasulev B, Gajewicz A, Hu X, Dasari TP, Michalkova A, Hwang HM, Toropov A, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J (2011) Using nano-QSAR to predict the cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. Nat Nanotechnol 6:175–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Report on The European Commission’s Public Online Consultation (2010) Towards a strategic nanotechnology action plan (SNAP) 2010–2015.
  44. Roco MC (2006) Nanotechnology’s future. Sci Am 295:39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roco MC (2007) The National Nanotechnology Initiative: past, present and future. In: Roco MC (ed) Handbook of nanoscience, engineering and technology, 2nd edn. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  46. Ryabchikova RI, Mazurkova, NA, Shikina NV, Ismagilov ZR (2010) The crystalline forms of titanium dioxide nanoparticles affect their interactions with individual cells. J Med CBR 8.
  47. Sayes CM, Reed KL, Warheit DB (2011) Nanoparticle toxicology: measurements of pulmonary hazard effects following exposures to nanoparticles. Methods Mol Biol 726:313–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schaeublin NM, Braydich-Stolle LK, Schrand AM, Miller JM, Hutchison J, Schlager JJ, Hussain SM (2011) Surface charge of gold nanoparticles mediates mechanism of toxicity. Nanoscale 3:410–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. SCHENHIR (2007) Opinion on the appropriateness of the risk assessment methodology in accordance with the technical guidance documents for new and existing substances for assessing the risks of nanomaterials, June 2007Google Scholar
  50. Special Eurobarometer 341/Wave 73.1. TNS Opinion & SocialS (2010)Google Scholar
  51. Stamm H (2011) Risk factors: nanomaterials should be defined. Nature 476:399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stirling A (2012) Opening up the politics of knowledge and power in bioscience. PLoS Biol 10(1):e1001233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Taniguchi N (1975) On the basic concept of ‘nano-technology’. In: Proceedings of international conference on production engineering Tokyo Part II. Japan Society of Precision EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  54. Tarantola M, Pietuch A, Schneider D, Rother J, Sunnick E, Rosman C, Pierrat S, Sönnichsen C, Wegener J, Janshoff A (2011) Toxicity of gold-nanoparticles: synergistic effects of shape and surface functionalization on micromotility of epithelial cells. Nanotoxicology 5:254–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. The Royal Society & The Royal Academy of Engineering (2004) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. Royal Society, London.
  56. Tomalia DA (2009) In quest of a systematic framework for unifying and defining nanoscience. J Nanopart Res 11:1251–1310. doi: 10.1007/s11051-009-9632-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tomalia DA (2010) Dendrons/dendrimers: quantized, nano-element like building blocks for soft–soft and soft–hard nano-compound synthesis. Soft Matter 6:456–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tourney C (2011) Democratizing nanotech, then and now. Nat Nanotechnol 6:605–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Trout DB, Schulte PA (2010) Medical surveillance, exposure registries, and epidemiologic research for workers exposed to nanomaterials. Toxicology 269:128–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Warheit DB, Webb TR, Colvin VL, Reed KL, Sayes CM (2007) Pulmonary bioassay studies with nanoscale and fine-quartz particles in rats: toxicity is not dependent upon particle size but on surface characteristics. Toxicol Sci 95:270–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeuroscienceIstituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche “Mario Negri”MilanItaly

Personalised recommendations