Nanotechnology: As we Look Towards the Future
That is exactly what Professor Jennifer Kuzma did at the 10th World Conference on Animal Production in Capetown South Africa which focused on technology and the future. Kuzma spoke to a delegation that came from the continents of Asia, Africa, Australia, Europe, South and North America on “Science and Technology Policy for Nanotechnology in Animal Production?.
Kuzma with her expertise in nanotechnology oversight policy presented an excellent picture of the potential benefits and risk of nanotechnology for animal agriculture and provided insight into the current management (or lack of management) for the technology.
In the United States there are over 800 nanotechnology products already on the market that span the array of goods from drugs to general consumer products etc. I personally own a pair of shoes where nanotechnology has been used in the sole of the shoe, and if any of you own the pants that water roles of off, you do too. I personally really like the technology and was willing to pay more for shoes that incorporated those features, so I would like to see this technology developed. But I would also like to know if other kinds of nanotechnology are safe, both to human health and the environment, especially if I may be eating the end product.
Under the current regulatory system the only form of nanotechnology that will defiantly have pre-market testing is drugs and medical devices. Manufacturing and many consumer products like cosmetics typically have no pre-market testing and agricultural products (which I will be focusing on for the rest of the post) may or may not have any pre-market testing. While many of these products are safe it can create worry. If the public is concerned about injury or even death from nano-products it could hinder development. As Professor Kuzma emphasizes it is best to engage people early and often. It is also necessary to have consistent regulatory framework.
Were I would argue people are most resistant to nanotechnology is in food (an extension to aversion to other GMO foods). But nanotechnology could create a revolution for agriculture and could actually provide better/healthier products. For example, bakery products with Omaga-3 and other dietary supplements or nanobarcodes which could also help trace food sources. Any of this sound surprisingly familiar? I personally like the Omaga-3 bars. While nanofoods can seem like an oddity it already comprises 7.0 Billion dollars of the food industry and that number is expected to grow to 20.4 billion by 2010.
Nanotechnology could also have environmental benefits by creating mechanisms to deliver pesticides and fertilizers more effectively. (It could also help with animal health by detecting diseases like the foot and mouth virus earlier. On the consumer side nanotechnology could also help detect spoilage etc.) Water contaminated by cattle is also a major concern. Nanotechnolgy could help monitor hydrological flowpaths in agricultural landscapes. This could help farmers and the public mitigate contamination.
In all of these advancements we still have to consider safety, the preservation of diversity and avoid creating additional technological haves and have-nots. However, if thought through there is defiantly a lot of potential for benefits.
The data used in this entry is courtesy of Professor Jennifer Kuzma. The actual post topic may deviate from her current focus.
