Hello Alchemie.
Alchemie said:
Does not that sound a little paranoid?
(By the way, that's quite amusing to read such a comment on this forum.
)
Well, such a story may
seem "a little paranoid", for sure.
But here we don't care about appearances (and opinions), we're in search for the (objective) Truth, aun't we ?
Knowledge protects...
To put it in a nutshell, what "I" learned about nanos so far is :
1/ the (psychopaths-driven) industry is creating and producing
more and more nanoparticles (and other nanotechnologies) since more than one or two decades. They are already
spreaded everywhere in the industrial world including western countries (maybe not yet in the deepest oceans, forests or deserts).
2/ for a given material nanoparticles do
not have
the same physical properties (and biological effects) than normal macro-scale particles
3/ nanoparticles are
small enough to be able to go through the skin or other mucus membranes, and even to get into cells !
For instance, researchers have found nanoparticles from gas-oil into
brains ! (They may have get there through the eyes.)
4/ our bodies are not prepared to get rid of ("detoxify") nanos, so generally
they accumulate in bodies.
5/ it's already proven that nanos
have a pro-inflammatory effect*, and
a carcinogenic effect is suspected
* for instance, that's the case of titanium dioxide, broadly used in cosmetics like sunscreen or toothpaste.
6/ the industry is creating new nano-materials like C60 (bukminsterfullerene) and other carbon nano-tubes* - but they are playing the sorcerer's apprentice, as we know almost nothing on their toxicity after a few years or decades, or by accumulation, aggregation, recombination, etc.
* already widely used for instance in car tires (to limit their wear and tear, but they do wear nonetheless, so I suppose that these nano-tubes "get wild" and that we are already breathing them.
7/ as usual the (psychopaths-driven) medicine industry try to sell us "nanos good to repair your health" (in the same manner as they sell GMOs to "fight hunger and feed the world").
and so on and so forth.
I beg your pardon, I'm lacking time to find some sources in English to quote, but I'm sure that's easy to find some on the web. You may begin by this WP article :
_https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanotoxicology
WikiPedia said:
Nanomaterials are able to cross biological membranes and access cells, tissues and organs that larger-sized particles normally cannot.[15] Nanomaterials can gain access to the blood stream via inhalation[16] or ingestion.[17] At least some nanomaterials can penetrate the skin;[18] even larger microparticles may penetrate skin when it is flexed.[19] Broken skin is an ineffective particle barrier,[20] suggesting that acne, eczema, shaving wounds or severe sunburn may accelerate skin uptake of nanomaterials. Then, once in the blood stream, nanomaterials can be transported around the body and be taken up by organs and tissues, including the brain, heart, liver, kidneys, spleen, bone marrow and nervous system.[20] Nanomaterials have proved toxic to human tissue and cell cultures, resulting in increased oxidative stress, inflammatory cytokine production and cell death.[16] Unlike larger particles, nanomaterials may be taken up by cell mitochondria[21] and the cell nucleus.[22][23] Studies demonstrate the potential for nanomaterials to cause DNA mutation[23] and induce major structural damage to mitochondria, even resulting in cell death.[21][24]
(...)
As the use of nanomaterials increases worldwide, concerns for worker and user safety are mounting. To address such concerns, the Swedish Karolinska Institute conducted a study in which various nanoparticles were introduced to human lung epithelial cells. The results, released in 2008, showed that iron oxide nanoparticles caused little DNA damage and were non-toxic. Zinc oxide nanoparticles were slightly worse. Titanium dioxide caused only DNA damage. Carbon nanotubes caused DNA damage at low levels. Copper oxide[disambiguation needed] was found to be the worst offender, and was the only nanomaterial identified by the researchers as a clear health risk.[26] The latest toxicology studies on mice involving exposure to carbon nanotubes (CNT) showed a limited pulmonary inflammatory potential of MWCNT at levels corresponding to the average inhalable elemental carbon concentrations observed in U.S.-based CNT facilities. The study estimated that considerable years of exposure are necessary for significant pathology to occur.
To me,
nanos are probably the next asbestos - a major public health scandal to come !
You can more or less easily protect yourself against, say, industrial food.
But it's hard (without living in an
ad hoc bunker) to protect someone from :
- nuclear radiation and particles
- electromagnetic pollution
- and nanoparticles (among other chemical toxic products).
That's why "I" feel
concerned (or paranoid ?) about this subject, and why I'm asking this question for the Cs.
