Keeping track of nanotechnology in the real world Todd Kuiken

Keeping track of nanotechnology
in the real world
Consumer Products Inventory 2.0
CPI History
• PEN started the CPI in 2005, the first of its kind
• Products in this inventory satisfy three criteria:
– They can be readily purchased by consumers, and
– They are identified as nano-based by the
manufacturer OR another source, and
– The nano-based claims for the product appear
reasonable
• Grown from 54 to nearly 2,000 products
– Many have come and gone (507 archived in CPI)
• Widely cited and also rightfully criticized due to
its lack of scientific data
New partnership with VT to improve CPI
• Nanomaterial descriptors:
– Composition
– Shape and dimensions
– Concentration
•
•
•
•
•
Function of nanomaterial in products
Location of the nanomaterial within products
Potential exposure pathways
Citations from scientific literature and patents
A descriptor of the reliability of our data (“How much
we know” categorization)
• In the future we hope to incorporate LCA data
2000
Total Number of Products (As of August 2014)
1819
1800
1600
1400
1317
1200
1015
1000
803
800
600
356
400
200
54
0
2005
2006
2008
2009
Year
2010
2014
450
Major Materials
400
350
2006
2011
2014
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Silver
Carbon
(Allotropes)
Titanium
Silicon/Silica
Zinc
Gold
How much we know
•
Category 1 (Extensively verified claim) The manufacturer has provided information
supporting the nanotechnology claim and this claim was verified by an independent
source. Actual product has been tested for nanomaterial or supporting documentation
references such product, and/or product was described in more than one published
scientific documents (such as research studies, patents, or reports).
•
Category 2 (Verified claim) The manufacturer has provided information supporting the
nanotechnology claim and this claim was verified by additional supporting documentation
about the specific nanomaterial that is claimed to be in the product.
•
Category 3 (Manufacturer-supported claim) The manufacturer has provided information
supporting the nanotechnology claim.
•
Category 4 (Unsupported claim) The manufacturer claims that the product contains
nanotechnology, but no specific information is provided to support this claim.
•
Category 5 (Not advertised by manufacturer) Nanotechnology claim is provided by source
other than manufacturer. Typically a news story, or third-party stores selling the product.
The CPI has brand-new
crowdsourcing capabilities
• Registered users can now:
– Add new products and make edits to existing
products
– Submit relevant data pertaining to nanoparticle
function, location, potential exposure pathways,
toxicity and other properties
– Contribute LCA data.
– Upload scientific references.
– Post comments.
The CPI continues to be utilized as a source
in inappropriate and misleading ways
• Based on the study, “Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles in Food
and Personal Care Products” we incorporated a list of
products that had been analyzed for the presence of titanium
dioxide and subsequently inferred that they also contain a
nanoscale component of titanium dioxide
• The addition of this study’s results into our inventory
increased the number of food products percentage wise,
significantly
• Since the study did not analyze the specific products for their
nanoscale components we classified all of those products in
the CPI as Category 5
Weir, A.; Westerhoff, P.; Fabricius, L.; Hristovski, K.; von Goetz, N. 2012. Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles in Food and Personal Care Products.
Environmental Science & Technology. 46, 2242-2250.
The CPI continues to be utilized as a source
in inappropriate and misleading ways
• Despite this classification and without contacting PEN for comment
or explanation of the data, Friends of the Earth released a report
entitled, “Tiny Ingredients Big Risks: Nanomaterials Rapidly Entering
Food and Farming”
– “Major food companies have rapidly introduced nanomaterials into our
food with no labels and scant evidence of their safety, within a regulatory
vacuum,” and “The report documents 85 food and beverage products on
the market known to contain nanomaterials”
• There were subsequent news stories based on the FOE report
which amplified their misleading results and attributed those
results to PEN, again without ever contacting PEN for comment or
explanation of the data.
– http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/05/nanotech-foodsafety-fda-nano-material
U.S. Regulatory Gaps
Beaudrie, C.E.H.; Kandlikar, M.; Satterfield, T. 2013. From Cradle –to-Grave at the Nanoscale:
Gaps in U.S. Regulatory Oversight along the Nanomaterial Life Cycle. Environmental Science &
Technology. 47, 5524-5534.
New FDA Approach
• In June 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released
guidance for industry regarding the use of nanomaterials in
cosmetic products and other FDA regulated products
– “Whether a material or end product is engineered to exhibit properties
or phenomena, including physical or chemical properties or biological
effects, that are attributable to its dimension(s), even if these
dimensions fall outside the nanoscale range, up to one micrometer
(1,000 nm).”
– More importantly the FDA is “particularly interested in the deliberate
and purposeful manipulation and control of dimensions to produce
specific properties, because the emergence of these new properties or
phenomena may raise questions about the safety, effectiveness,
performance, quality or public health impact that may warrant further
evaluation”
Looking Forward
• Scanning the nanotechnology landscape through the
lens of consumer products shows that the path of
governance which evaluates, regulates and engages
the public on nanotechnology is foggy
• The vast array of regulations, definitions and lack of
clarity, primarily within the U.S. regulatory system, has
the potential to disrupt nanotechnology innovation
• One lesson learned from our experience managing the
CPI is that absent LCA studies, clear and identifiable
governance systems, transparency from companies and
improved public understanding about the
nanomaterials being utilized in consumer products will
continue to breed misinformation, confusion and
potential backlash towards nanotechnology
Thank you……
Virginia Tech Contributors: Marina E. Quadros, Sean
McGinnis, Mathew Hull and Michael Hochella
Wilson Center Contributor: Todd Kuiken –
todd.kuiken@wilsoncenter.org
CPI: http://www.nanotechproject.org/cpi/