It seems that some people are worried by the arrival of nanotechnology and how they could affect our lives.
Scott R. Burnell tells us the story.
As scientists continue to explore nanotechnology, which involves manipulating matter at the atomic or molecular level, they need to adopt both modest government regulation and open professional conduct to ensure public trust in the discipline, a study released Wednesday cautions.
The study, "Forward to the Future: Nanotechnology and Regulatory Policy," draws on society's experience with nuclear power, genetic engineering and other breakthrough technologies, said Glenn Harlan Reynolds, the study's author.
A professor at the University of Tennessee College of Law in Knoxville, Reynolds also is a member of the board of directors at the Foresight Institute in Palo Alto, Calif., a nonprofit organization focusing on how emerging disciplines such as nanotech can help society.
"Nanotech is inevitable, but the kind of nanotech future we get is still very much in doubt," Reynolds told United Press International. "I would much rather see a positive future where nanotechnology is primarily civilian and beneficial, rather than military and destructive."
He thinks that extreme measures, like absolute prohibition or classified development are not workable. Instead, he argues that modest regulation will be sufficient. But it needs to be correctly done.
Failure to perform such work and keep the public and lawmakers informed would leave nanotech vulnerable to the same factors that led to genetically modified foods being labeled "Frankenfood" by environmentalists, said Julia A. Moore, a public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center. Frequent and open hearings and other government meetings on the issue will help the public understand nanotech's usefulness, which should also engender their trust, she said.
Source: Scott R. Burnell, United Press International, for NewsFactor Network, November 21, 2002
6:01:13 PM
Permalink
|
|
