Rebecca Wright10.01.10
Technology has taken society to places once thought impossible—from air travel to Internet shopping to cars that can parallel park themselves. But sometimes technology moves too fast for us to comprehend future implications, both the benefits and the risks. This is the case with nanotechnology. By some accounts it allows scientists to “play God” by rearranging molecules on a nano scale to create things never before possible.
In a recent Reuters article, the issue of nano foods was discussed. In essence, scientists have figured out a way to employ nanotechnology to make low-fat or fat-free foods “just as appetizing and satisfying as their full-fat fellows.” The article went on to say that this development could play a major role in staving off diseases such as diabetes, heart disease and obesity.
The problem is, in order to protect these advancements and proprietary information, there is a certain degree of secrecy that must be maintained, according to the companies involved. And secrecy is never a good thing as far as today’s consumers are concerned. The Reuters article suggested that nondisclosure and refusal to communicate about all aspects of nanotechnology—good and bad—“could foster the same mistrust that led GM (genetic modification) to be branded ‘Frankenstein food’ in many parts of Europe and could mean some of nano food’s potential remains unfulfilled for years.”
Amazingly, according to nanotechnews, the U.S. nanomaterial market, which totaled only $125 million in 2000, is expected to exceed $30 billion by 2020. In terms of food specifically, Reuters cited a British parliamentary report that said the global market for nanotechnology in food was $140 million in 2006 but is expected to swell to $5.6 billion by 2012. The possibilities for several products are endless, but then so are the risks.
The nanotechnology debate certainly contains similar threads to the one surrounding genetically modified organisms (GMOs). That while science has birthed two discoveries with the potential to change the world—literally and figuratively—not enough is known about the long-term implementation of these technologies in products intended for widespread human consumption. One Unilever researcher interviewed by Reuters admitted, “We need to go further into understanding how matter works, and then bring that knowledge into how we prepare food for our products…we’re at the very beginning.”
And if you think nanotechnology doesn’t apply to you, think again. Many products in this industry contain nanomaterials in their packaging as well as in the food, beverages and supplements themselves. Nanotechnology helps packaging perform better, helps food stay fresher longer and helps deliver nutrients to the body more efficiently. To say that we should stamp out the potential of nanotechnology altogether out of fear—like some would argue with regard to GMOs—is incredibly shortsighted. We can and should use nanotechnology to improve our products, as long as we proceed with caution.
Rebecca Wright
Editor
