- Two hundred companies are already working on inserting
nanotechnology into food, posing "immense" risks to health, new
research claims.
-
- The study estimates that use of the technology in food
has created an industry, now worth more than £1bn, which will grow
within six years to more than £10bn, with thousands of firms involved.
-
- Last week, Prince Charles, writing exclusively in The
Independent on Sunday, warned that the technology, which uses microscopic
particles, a million of which would fit on a pin head, could lead to "upsets"
similar to the Thalidomide disaster, unless care were taken. Leading scientists
and the Royal Society condemned him for the analogy, but today he is backed
by a leading expert on the technology, Professor Gregor Wolbring, himself
affected by the drug Thalidomide.
-
- Nanotechnology, which is set to revolutionise industry
and everyday life, deals with particles so small the laws of physics no
longer apply. The technology could bring great benefits, such as medicines
precisely geared to curing particular organs. But it also poses great dangers
since some of the particles affect the immune system. There are no special
regulations on their use and little research has been done on their safe
application.
-
- The report, by Helmut Kaiser, a German consultancy, concludes
that, with nanotechnology, industry is set to design food "with much
more ... precision, and lower costs and sustainability". It adds:
"The change is dramatic, the potentials are immense, and the risks
too." The technology is already used to preserve foods, and boost
flavour and nutritional values.
-
- Meanwhile, a report for the US Department of Agriculture,
describing some of these applications, says that nanotechnology "has
the potential to revolutionise agriculture and food systems".
-
- Prince Charles's warning sparked worldwide controversy.
Professor Steve Jones, of University College London, called him "a
classic woolly thinker", and Lord Winston, the fertility expert, said
he had raised "spectres'' and "science scares". Mark Welland,
professor of nanotechnology at Cambridge University, said the reference
to Thalidomide was "inappropriate and irrelevant".
-
- The Royal Society criticised the prince's comparison,
since nanotechnology was "not a new drug".
-
- But Professor Wolbring, of the University of Calgary,
Canada, who was born without legs after his mother took Thalidomide in
pregnancy, called such criticism "stupidity". He added: "The
prince's use of the ... analogy, to draw our attention to the often unanticipated
consequences of [well intended] science, is timely."
-
- © 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=542140
|
