8/27/2002 A BOSTON GLOBE EDITORIAL Growing nanoknowledge [Full Text IN MANY MINDS, the question ''How safe is nanotechnology?'' is eclipsed by the more basic ''What is nanotechnology?''
Once it seemed like science fiction, a fantasy about molecule-sized machines that could build food atom by atom, cure illnesses, or turn coal into diamonds.
Today nanotechnology is hard science. Its potential still outweighs its public presence, but a great deal of research is being done by the federal government, university researchers, and companies. In fiscal year 2002, the federal government invested $604 million in nanotechnology.
Among today's nanotechnology visions is a cure for cancer. Instead of chemotherapy, which kills cancerous and healthy cells, nanotechnology could produce engineered drugs that would target only cancer cells.
Nanotechnology could be used to manufacture replacement bones and organs. Computers could be smaller and faster. Materials could be much stronger, lighter, and ''smarter,'' such as a tent that pitches itself.
Critics ask whether nanotechnology could do harm. There are ethical and scientific worries. Could nanoproducts harm people or trigger disasters? Should humans tinker with fundamentals of the way things are?
A Canadian activist organization called the ETC Group, which advocates for socially responsible technology, argues that leaders who attend the World Summit on Sustainable Development this week should declare a moratorium on the commercial development of nanomaterials. The group calls for a global assessment of nanotechnology's social, economic, health, and environmental impacts.
The reasoning is sound. Protecting people and the environment must be the priority. But a moratorium is the wrong method.
Life already exists at the atomic level. Nanotechnology is a tool that lets humans access this microscopic world, explains Mihail Roco, senior adviser for nanotechnology at the National Science Foundation. He sees a vast opportunity to advance human health.
In addition, nanotechnology relies on partnerships among government scientists, academics, and companies to bring diverse minds and funding to research and development. The ongoing challenge is for the federal government to know what's being done and what protections should be in place.
The National Science Foundation is doing a lot of this work. In 2000 it set up the National Nanotechnology Initiative, which reviews commercial activities and funds ethical investigations. The Environmental Protection Agency is funding proposals to study the societal impacts and potential harmful effects of nanotechnology.
As long as humane values keep up with technological change, scientists and businessmen alike should pursue nanoknowledge. [End]
This story ran on page A14 of the Boston Globe on 8/27/2002. © Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company.