Comments on: Published Research Synopsis: Toxic Potential of Nanotechnology http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html Chronicling and Commenting on Human Progress Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:11:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: Paul http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-34894 Paul Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:08:13 +0000 http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-34894 Layman alert!! Could someone enlighten me as to the scale of the "molecular machine" in relation to a human hair etc. Much appreciated. Layman alert!!

Could someone enlighten me as to the scale of the “molecular machine” in relation to a human hair etc.

Much appreciated.

]]> By: maryam http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-4519 maryam Mon, 16 Oct 2006 12:30:23 +0000 http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-4519 hi iam student and i hoped that obtain information this site hi iam student and i hoped that obtain information this site

]]> By: Anthony Kendall http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-172 Anthony Kendall Sun, 12 Feb 2006 04:28:05 +0000 http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-172 The Guy, Hey, I'm not anti-nanotech by any means. The "specious arguments" I presented were in summary of a review article in the journal Science. I would be inerested in seeing a reference for the irritating solvents thing, because the authors of the review paper did not mention that either. I think you need to show a bit more evidence for your claims of researchers being alarmist, or that their research is questionable. I pass no damning judgement in this piece, not by any means. I'm not sure if you read my entire article, because in the Context section I make it pretty clear that I feel the toxicity research shows that we can proceed with nanotech research with caution. After all, a few billion dollar class-action lawsuits will kill any industry, so a bit of caution is necessary. The Guy,
Hey, I’m not anti-nanotech by any means. The “specious arguments” I presented were in summary of a review article in the journal Science. I would be inerested in seeing a reference for the irritating solvents thing, because the authors of the review paper did not mention that either. I think you need to show a bit more evidence for your claims of researchers being alarmist, or that their research is questionable.

I pass no damning judgement in this piece, not by any means. I’m not sure if you read my entire article, because in the Context section I make it pretty clear that I feel the toxicity research shows that we can proceed with nanotech research with caution. After all, a few billion dollar class-action lawsuits will kill any industry, so a bit of caution is necessary.

]]> By: The Guy http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-171 The Guy Sun, 12 Feb 2006 02:31:27 +0000 http://www.anthonares.net/2006/02/published-research-synopsis-toxic-potential-of-nanotechnology.html#comment-171 More specious arguments based on questionable research. For instance: the rat research done above. No one ever mentions that powerfully irritating solvents were used along with the carbon nanotubes. These sort of unsubstantiated reports and questionable research procedures are the hallmark of alarmists attempting to gain noteriety. Lets wait a bit (especially since most if not all of these materials are still constrained to the lab) before we pass damning judgement. By the way, dihydrogen monoxide is a nanoparticle composed of just three atoms and would you like to do without that? More specious arguments based on questionable research. For instance: the rat research done above. No one ever mentions that powerfully irritating solvents were used along with the carbon nanotubes. These sort of unsubstantiated reports and questionable research procedures are the hallmark of alarmists attempting to gain noteriety. Lets wait a bit (especially since most if not all of these materials are still constrained to the lab) before we pass damning judgement.
By the way, dihydrogen monoxide is a nanoparticle composed of just three atoms and would you like to do without that?

]]>