I was very pleased to be able to participate in the European Commission’s invitation-only 1st Annual Nanotechnologies Safety for Success Dialogue in Brussels on October 25-26, 2007. The focus was nano-enabled food, consumer products, and medical applications. Our host was the EU Directorate-General of Health & Consumer Protection (DG SANCO). Participants represented the regional European governments, the US FDA, non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) like NRDC, academic scientists, and industry.

Imagine my surprise to realize that the US FDA and industry were both adamantly against the labeling of consumer products that contain nanomaterials. The US feds and the industries both parroted the same line: ‘we don’t want to unnecessarily scare the public away from beneficial products with inaccurate or incomplete information’. When I pushed our US FDA representative to provide a tangible real-world example of a beneficial consumer product that the public may miss out on, he was unable to provide anything other than hypothetical future products promised (but not yet delivered) by the nanotech industry.

In contrast to the US feds and industry, the Director-General of SANCO, Robert Madelin, cut deeply into this argument. I’ll paraphrase here on his remarks: When you tell me it’s out there already, I get worried. I’m not stupid, but when you don’t give me information than I am stupid. Companies are hiding things because they think that the public doesn’t need to know, or that companies don’t want to talk about it until the definitions and testing standards are established. And, then, when things go wrong industry “will come crying to me and ask me to fix it” because industry “screwed up from the beginning.”

Who was that masked man? But, seriously, Madelin has a point here. The issue of consumer product labeling is about the public’s right to know and to make informed choices. The arguments put forth by industry and the US FDA fall flat. Yes, we need to provide accurate information to the public, and yes, we need to develop standard definitions, testing methods, and health assessments. But, since nanomaterials are already in hundreds of consumer products including food packaging without having undergone safety testing, the public has a right to know. And, industry and regulators have an obligation to provide information, oversight, and public protection.

An inhalation toxicologist and nanomaterial specialist made a presentation that included his laboratory data on the similarities between carbon nanotubes and asbestos. It seems that since both are fibers and both are rigid, both are unable to be effectively destroyed by the body's natural defense mechanisms. The result? Damage to the lung leading to permanent, progressive lung fibrosis. Yet, carbon nanotubes are already showing up in tennis rackets, hockey sticks, and bike parts. They are stronger and lighter than steel, making them a desireable component of many consumer products. 

A 2006 report by the World Health Organization estimated that world-wide, 13 million deaths annually are due to preventable environmental causes, primarily from unsafe drinking water, poor sanitation, and air pollution. These statistics include an estimated 1.4 million preventable deaths annually from environmentally-triggered cancer.

Preventing predictable health and environmental harms can be done with vigilance and forethought. Nanomaterials are a new generation of chemicals, with a new opportunity to develop the technology in a safe and sustainable way. It doesn’t have to be the next asbestos.