Print | Forums

Mitsubishi: Out Front in Nanotech

The case: To ensure that a commercial market emerges, Mitsubishi is working ahead of time to abate concerns about the health effects of the carbon molecules known as fullerenes.

The question: What should companies be doing to address fullerene fears? When does it make sense to work proactively with government?

Ann Gergely, former scientist with Monsanto, now Senior Scientific Consultant, Keller & Heckman LLP, Brussels

Industry needs to accept that even though existing toxicology endpoints and health/environmental regulations were not devised with nanotechnology in mind, they need to make use of them now. In addition to this, they can create their own tailored protocol to show the public that they are going above and beyond to evaluate acute toxicity and water solubility.

Richard G. Stoll, environmental law specialist and partner at Foley & Lardner LLP, Washington, DC:

Some agenda-driven interest groups, using questionable scientific studies, want to create fear about fullerenes in the public. Nanotech companies need to conduct their own solid research on a proactive basis for credibility and liability reasons. Companies should also be proactive in assuring that government studies [related to nanotechnology] are based on sound science.

These companies should be aware that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an arm of the White House, is administering a new law within the federal government called the Data Quality Act, which applies to all federal agencies. It is designed to assure that studies conducted or disseminated by federal agencies have sufficient scientific integrity and objectivity, are based on valid data, have been through peer review, and can be challenged.

Tim Harper, Founder & President, Cientifica Group, a nanotech consultancy; Publisher, Trends In Nanotechnology Weekly; formerly with the European Space Agency, Madrid:

The only way to address fears is to do the research into toxicology, and then ensure that appropriate regulations are in place to protect the public or environment. The research has to be totally independent and should be performed in the public interest, not as a result of funding by companies and organizations with an interest in the results.

Raj Bawa, President, Bawa Biotechnology Consulting, and Adjunct Prof. at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; formerly with the US Patent & Trademark Office, Washington, DC:

Companies should help the public and the media put nanoparticle risk into proper context. To do this, companies need to put their own relationship with the media into proper context. Working with the media is of vital importance. Most companies don’t put much time into building relationships with reporters. Nanotech critics, on other hand, are highly skilled with the media.