Nanophobia

This article published in the New York Times examines nanophobia, the fear of engineered nanoparticles invading the human body. The article makes reference to revolutionary creams and lotions that “contain tiny components designed to work more effectively.” I do not understand how lotions can be made more effective. You put it on and it helps get rid of dry skin. Simple. I am inclined to believe that existing products would not really benefit from the addition of nanoparticles and that the skin care industry is merely using science and chemical engineering as a marketing tool. Perhaps companies and advertisers are once again taking advantage of the legitimizing power the American public awards to science. It seems as though this is the case. I am reminded of the failed invention I researched. Shoe store customers from the 1920s to the 1950s loved to use x-rays to see their feet inside of the shoes so that they could choose a size that offered a “perfect fit”. The success of the shoe fluoroscope demonstrates that most people love to embrace an invention claiming to improve their lives or health.

But apparently, some scientists and doctors are worried about the consequences of these nanoparticles penetrating the skin, accumulating, and causing organ failure. The body’s possible inability to metabolize certain types of engineered nanoparticles has raised concern among members of the medical community who are researching what would happen if nanoparticles were to enter airways or blood vessels. However, it seems impossible to prevent nanoparticles already in existence from entering the body. Aren’t our bodies already exposed to small particles on a regular basis from numerous sources? Who knows what’s floating around in the air right now? I shudder to think of the answer to that question. The article suggests that some companies, such as those involved in the cosmetics and sunscreen industries, are manufacturing products containing harmful metals which normally do not penetrate the skin but are able to do so if they are nano-sized. That’s great. Nanoparticles can be added to the long list of carcinogens. Nonetheless, there are positive uses for nanoparticles. For instance, the efficacy of medication can be improved with the addition of nanoparticles. Designing nanoparticles for use in lotions and makeup seems somewhat frivolous. Medicinal drugs would probably benefit the most from nanoparticle research.

I think it is interesting that the article points out that nanoparticles can be thought of as an extension of modern society’s desire to miniaturize objects. Laptops, cell phones, and iPods are examples of devices that are constantly being reduced in size. Now the skin care industry wants to design products containing small, engineered particles to help mask wrinkles and hide the effects of aging. Perhaps the prevailing popular opinion is that smallness is an indication of progress and advancement.