Nanotechnology Grows Up

Forget the futuristic visions of molecular-scale devices that seek out and destroy cancer cells and repair faulty heart valves. The truth is that nano-technology is already here. Intel and other computer-chip companies already sell tens of billions of dollars worth of chips every year packed with electronic circuitry patterned down to the nanoscale. Computer hard drives, LED-based traffic signals, CD players, and low-friction coatings account for billions more in sales. So it was only natural that, at a meeting of the American Chemical S o c i e t y (AC S) h e r e i n March, you could almost hear the collective groan when Eva Oberdörster, a toxicologist at Southern Methodist University in Dal-las, Texas, told nanoscience researchers that water laced with all-carbon nanoparticles called buckyballs could damage cell membranes in the brains of fish. The story was picked up by newspapers around the globe (as well as Science's daily news Web site ScienceNOW). Researchers and policymakers fretted that such coverage could poison public perception of all things nano— including the vast majority of applications that have nothing to do with bucky-balls—and put the field on the same path as previous abortive scientific revolutions such as agricultural biotechnology and nuclear power. Nanotechnology has not gained that level of notoriety yet. And perhaps it won't. But the field stands at a critical crossroads in public perception. " Nanotechnology is growing up, " says Vicki Colvin, a nano-technology researcher at Rice University in Houston, Texas. Government funding, research , and private investment in the field are all booming, boosting nanotech's visibility as well as scrutiny from outsiders. Regulatory agencies, researchers, and health and environmental watchdogs are investigating how nanoscale materials affect human health and the environment. Many observers worry that the field may be growing up too fast for its own good and that regulators can't keep pace with the release of new nano-based products. A lag, they say, ups the risk that news about environmental dangers from one form of nanomatter could spark a public backlash against the whole nanotechnology enterprise. " Nanotech is in danger of becoming another Frankenfood controversy , " says Julia Moore, a senior adviser in the National Science Foundation's (NSF's) Office of International Science and Engineering in Arlington, Virginia, who closely tracks nanotechnology's progress and is writing a book about the backlash against genetically modified food. The fears are rooted in a basic …