I enjoyed reading your recent report and was pleased to see a well balanced view and high level of expertise in the broad field of nanotechnology. I totally agree with your definition of nanotechnology and the sub 100nm definition.

I think it's important to push for more up to date health regulations before science leaps even further ahead of current regulations. e.g. taking into account the size of particles, not just the quantity. Smaller particle are more likely to enter the lungs and remain there. Mind you, regulations are worthless if the London Underground is allowed to stay open when toxic particles are 30 times higher than the safe levels recommended by the WHO. Regulations with teeth should be called for otherwise there's little point in having them, apart from being able to quote them when claiming compensation for health related problems!

Nanoparticles may need to be classed as hazardous materials, especially during disposal. Some types of airborne nanoparticles that will undoubtedly escape into the open will be far more complicated than current pollutants and the long term effects of interacting with nature and respiratory systems are unknown. Research is required.

Well done and thank you for the easily digestible report on the web.

Gary Fenton
IT Consultant & Journalist