Size isn’t everything, or is it? Nano or non-nano

Is the “nano” label just marketing buzz and PR puff? You might think so given the huge number of products and press releases that exist where this little prefix, from the Greek meaning dwarf, is used instead of a more everyday description. Particles become far more interesting to consumers and grant-awarding peers when they become nanoparticles. Atomic clusters are so 1970s, but nanoclusters? Now, you’re talking. And, not to ignore that tubular field of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) and copper nanotubes…where would we be without them? Unfortunately, marketing executives have hijacked the prefix for countless non-nano products, hoping to exploit the buzz.

Of course, nanoscience and nanotechnology really are likely to be revolutionary as our understanding of entities that lie between the molecular and the bulk scales improves and our skills in designing and constructing such entities evolves. Some pundits suggest that nano could be bigger than steam or penicillin. However, for that to happen, we probably need a better definition of nano and to exclude those developments and products that are irrelevant to the endeavour.

There are already several legitimate nano products that are increasingly in widespread use. For instance, the textiles industry is using conducting polyaniline nanocoating to reduce static cling in artificial fibres, silver nanoparticles show improved efficacy as antibacterial agents and other precious metals in nanoparticulate form are much improved catalysts than their traditionally powdered counterparts. Titania and zinc oxide nanoparticles are also used and marketed for their enhanced UV filtering and antibacterial capacity.

Physical chemists Simon Forster, Sandro Olveira and Stefan Seeger of the University of Zurich, Switzerland, have published a backgrounder on the world of nano, which they say provides both scientific background information and market data about the nano-enabled products and could help mesh chemical insights with economic analyses. Their case studies show that some commercialised technologies have several application fields, whereas others are only found in one market but it is the pharmaceutical sector that is currently the most important of today’s nanotechnology markets.

The researchers point to several potential applications of nano materials, among them: functionalised nanomagnets for extracting molecules from blood, drug delivery with nanocapsules for targeting disease sites in the body more precisely, controlled release of “active” cosmetic agents on the skin, nanoparticles of iron and zinc for food supplementation that
increase bioavailability of iron without affecting colour or taste. They also highlight how carbon nanotubes might be woven into to composite yarns to create multifunctional textiles that are bullet-proof, lightweight and highly conductive, silicone nanofilaments might render a clothing material self-cleaning through the super-hydrophobic effect. They point out that nanotechnology could boost power delivery from rechargeable batteries while nano incorporated into smart windows might generate electricity for the building and keep it cool in summer and warm in winter. Many of these developments are research nanoscience and not yet marketable nanotechnology, although as mentioned there are nano products on the market, and probably too many non-nano marketed inappropriately with that tag. Most common abuse is referring to micro (1-100 micrometre dimensions) entities as nano (1-100 nm).

The table shows a range of nano products and their application sectors as defined by Forster and colleagues.

 

 

According to Lux Research, the total market for nanotechnology was about US$238 billion in 2008 and is predicted to grow to US$3100 billion in 2015, bullish and bearish estimates lie either side of that value depending on whether or not the research agency offering them is optimistic or pessimistic about the world economy. The US National Science Foundation (NSF) suggests turnover will be less than a third that prediction at closer to US$1000 billion by 2015 (Cientifica Ltd provides an estimate of US$1500 million for 2015). It is likely that pharma and food will have the greatest share of this market irrespective of its size. The cosmetic industry may have taken out lots of nano patents, but its activities in exploiting the technology are limited by its inherent need to avoid efficacy that might be construed as medicinal by the regulatory authorities. Textiles, automotive and construction while often seen as innovative in many ways are unlikely to take anything but a relatively small portion of the nano market pie.

The emergence and growth of the nano market will, of course, depend almost entirely on strong research efforts that will tap its potential. Whether scientists and technologist will truly catch the buzz is a different matter. The evolution of the field might also pivot on how nano and non-nano are defined ultimately and the growing public awareness and perception of nano and the safety of such products especially given ludicrous remarks about the discipline turning the world into a grey goo.

Research Blogging IconSimon P. Forster, Sandro Olveira, & Stefan Seeger (2011). Nanotechnology in the market: promises and realities Int. J. Nanotechnol., 8 (6/7), 592-613

60 million chemicals

There are now 60 million chemicals in the CAS Registry, that’s a number equivalent to 3G users in China, the population of the Roman Empire in 70 BC, the age of the Rocky Mountains in years, the number of casualties in WWII, and the votes cast in American Idol. The last time I mentioned the CAS count was September 2009, when it reached 50 million entries. I remember it reaching the 10 million mark in 1990 (a year or so after I’d started working for the Royal Society of Chemistry, RSC). That seemed like a major achievement given that it had taken CAS 33 years to go from 0 to 10 million.

 

 

The 60-millionth substance in the CAS registry is a putative antiviral agentt and has the CAS # 1298016-92-8. It was discovered by researchers at the Institute of Materia Medica, in China and is a patent pending derivative of 2-amino-1,3,4-thiadiazine.

You are not full of *%$!

You are not full of *%$! – I remember reading probably, 25 years ago, an article in the “health” section of a magazine that claimed we’re all getting ill because of the impacted fecal matter in our colons. 10 kilos of the stuff, clogging us up, making us sick, causing joint pain and dulling the mind…gettting rid of it through detox and/or colonic irrigation will make you well. It’s all nonsense, of course, as any colon surgeon will tell you.

The bottom line is that in medicine, ‘detoxification’ has a specific meaning, and alt-med ‘detox’ believers have appropriated the term for something that has little or nothing to do with its real medical meaning. Alt-med detox has more to do with exorcism and bad humors than real medicine. Squirting warm water up your backside is not going to detoxify your system and will only make you feel better if you enjoy the actual process.

New Facebook friends and blogging advice

If you’ve been on Facebook for any length of time you will have had friend requests from people you don’t know. That’s fine. Often they’re just spammers. Sometimes, they’re users with whom you might have a few friends in common. If paths haven’t crossed I usually redirect requests to the Sciencebase Facebook page instead of automatically accepting the request. Occasionally, the new wouldbe friend turns out already to “like” the page, says so and starts a conversation. Also fine. Half proves they’re not some kind of bot. Virtual friendships can spring from such occurrences. It’s what this social media lark is all about, right?

Indian medical blogger Pranab Chatterjee who runs Scepticemia, sent me a friend request and I went through the process described above and he pointed out that he already liked the fan page, was surprised to learn I also run Sciencetext and wondered how I manage to juggle so many words at once. He also thought that I might be able to offer him some advice on boosting visitors to his blog as he felt like it had reached a plateau. He wanted the recipe for my secret sauce of success…well I don’t have one, I just work (probably too) hard and hope for the best. So, I turned the tables on Pranab and asked him what I could do to improve my blog.

He was a little taken aback, but offered some encouraging words about the liking the clean look of the blogs and putting in a request for more hardcore medical posts, he’s a doctor, hence the interest. I do write about medical matters, but I will probably leave the hardcore stuff to the hardcore medical bloggers (and I don’t mean Dr G)

Anyway, if there is a recipe for blogging success, other than going black hat it has to be plenty of persistence a wadge of hard work, and perhaps a very strong background in the subject on which you’re blogging coupled with experience in the wider journalism industry and/or experience in science (or other field) and the conference circuit. I think enjoying writing probably helps as does have an analytical approach. Being active in social media, particularly Facebook and Twitter seems to help raise one’s profile although is not really reflected in traffic, in my experience (a few hundred to a thousands new visits extra each week, perhaps) and the occasional spike. Others might perceive that differently, but more than 80% of Sciencebase traffic is still search engine derived. Nevertheless, make sure every new blog post is as perfect and precise as you can, and then tell your Facebook followers, twitter crowd about it. It’s also always worth doing a spot of whitehat SEO, just to improve search traffic benefit.

That’s just a few, almost random thoughts. Bottom line is: if you enjoy writing, you probably should have a blog. If you enjoy people you probably should make friends.

Is freewill a happy illusion?

Is freewill a happy illusion? – Is freewill real or is just one of our happy illusions? According to a post on 3quarks, it might be that believing in freewill makes your brain behave as if you actually have it. “When people’s belief in freewill was experimentally reduced [not sure how that’s done], pre-conscious motor preparation, or that activity that precedes action, in the brain was delayed by more than one second relative to those who believed in freewill — an eternity in brain time.” That’s plenty of time for “conscious” choices to be made, choices that one might call freewill, whether one believes in it or not.

How heavy is your data?

Russ Swan of Russ Swan fame, mentioned recently that he had taken part in NASA’s Face in Space program as he’d always dreamed of being an astronaut and this was probably as close to getting into space as he was ever likely to achieve. “A picture of my ugly mug is currently orbiting the Earth on board Endeavour,” he said. Of course, Swan’s near doppelgänger Virgin Galactic’s Richard Branson might be looking for volunteers for the test flights of his “space ship”…

Swan and Branson - space-race dreams

Anyway, Swan is looking forward to downloading his certificate of flight, although he concedes that it’s all just a little misleading, as the picture in question is a massless digital file. Weightless perhaps, but massless? I wasn’t convinced by that assertion and mused on the possibility that some kind of relativistic effect might come into play when data are added to a storage medium, increase the potential energy by adding information and that would equate to an increase in mass according to Einstein’s famous equation E = mc^2…possibly.

Swan was not convinced and asked, “Is my camera’s memory more massive when I’ve taken a picture? Does the stored image have mass? I’m pretty sure that taking my picture with them, as a digital file, has no payload implications for the Shuttle…Flash drives are set to a binary 1 by default, and a 0 is set by applying a voltage. This is like opening or closing a door on the memory cell, and involves no stored charge (as far as I know), so I think there isn’t even an electron’s mass difference between the two states.” However, he qualified his response with the phrase, “But I could be wrong…”.

So, I talked to a physicist friend, Nykolai Bilianiuk, who explains that most storage media would not gain mass when data are added to them, in fact, some might actually lose mass. All is not lost in the mass debate, however.

“For EEPROM and Flash media, data is stored by trapping electrons after injection through an oxide, a state from which they cannot easily quantum-tunnel their way out. In this case, changing the content of a memory does change the number of electrons stored in that cell, and therefore obviously the mass is changed,” Bilianuk explains, “The same holds for dynamic RAM and photographic CCDs, which store data in the form of buckets of electrons in tiny capacitors.”

So, while your data might be weightless in outer space it may not be massless. Swan’s mugshot could very well be adding to fuel consumption aboard Endeavour after all!

Latest science news with a spectral twist

  • Romantic notes – Cassis base 345B, undecavertol, 1,3-oxathiane oxane, isospirene… Perfume can be so romantic! But the chemical components underpinning the often-enticing and seductive smells of fragrances are, one might say equal parts art and science. One of the most intriguing elements of several fragrances, including popular perfumes like Le monde est beau by Daniela Andrier and DKNY Be Delicious by Maurice Roucel is the fruity top note – blackcurrant.
  • Socioeconomic pollutants – How much socioeconomic factors affect exposure to persistent organic pollutants, especially during vulnerable periods of life such as pregnancy and childhood, is not yet well understood. A new study has investigated the relationship between maternal social class, based on occupation type, and placental concentrations of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and the combined estrogenic activity of analytes as revealed by a biomarker for exposure.
  • Heavy metal drugs – Metals and metalloid impurities are an increasing focus for pharmaceutical regulators anticipating high standards of QC/QA for pharmaceuticals with regard to efficacy and patient safety. A review by a team at Bristol-Myers Squibb assesses the various techniques available to the industry. The report offers insights into how these various applications can be used and ultimately how they might address concerns about metal toxicity in raw materials, intermediates, active pharmaceutical ingredients and final drug products.
  • Ancient minerals – The discovery of the oldest mineral in the solar system, krotite, found in an unusual refractory inclusion of the meteorite NWA 1934 from northwest Africa, provides an unprecedented look back into deep time to the first planetary materials formed in our solar system.

Current issue of David Bradley’s SpectroscopyNOW column

What’s WOT?

What’s WOT? – Web of Trust (WOT) is a free community-drive tool for safe web surfing. It helps all web users stay safe by rating sites according to various criteria: trustworthiness, vendor reliability, privacy and child-friendliness. Add the add-on to your browser and it will reveal problematic sites as you search, surf, shop and socialise online. It works when you’re using Google, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, Bing, Wikipedia and other popular sites. The WoT community has already rated millions of websites, if you join MyWot you get to add your ratings.

Earlier this week I saw several educated sorts caught out by phishing scams and dodgy links on Facebook. Using WoT might have protected them. Today WoT has also announced integration with Facebook, which might add a layer of protection without users having to load the add-on. Here’s hoping.

  • Facebook’s Newest Wall (technologyreview.com)
  • WOT Can Keep You Safe in Facebook and Twitter? (techie-buzz.com)

Why is teaching environmental science so controversial?

Environmental science is about as politically charged a discipline you might find, stem cells GMOs, vaccines, and nuclear energy notwithstanding. In some circles, particularly certain sectors of academia and the media, environmental discussions are synonymous with controversial debates.

So, asks environmental scientist, Chyrisse Tabone of Argosy University in Pittsburgh, USA, how can educators teach students about the science without diluting the issues, dumbing down the curriculum, or being accused of politicizing their lectures? She emphasises that students need a safe environment in which they can weigh up compelling arguments, deal with the complex scientific and value-laden issues and develop their own critical thinking skills to wade through the political quagmire of misinformation and insubstantial evidence weighing heavily on both sides of any environmental issue.

Tabone and many scientists like her with many years, if not decades, of experience “in the field” have recently begun to recognise that theirs is a “controversial science”. In the 1970s, environmental science was not yet an umbrella term for the mix of biology, botany, chemistry, ecology, geology, and meteorology we know today. At the time, it was semantically nothing more than a component of the overall remit of the earth science faculty. Although there were public health implications, perhaps sparked by the (in)famous Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, the subject itself was not burdened with the baggage with which it is associated today viz. the climate change (so-called) debate and other hot global issues.

The advent of mass media and its apparently insatiable appetite for environmental stories has led us to a state of affairs in which every climatic phenomenon, every aspect of oil drilling or pollution targets is fair game for pundits the world over. Lay people, including political commentators now think of themselves as “experts” in the science, and there are no end of books from political pundits, statisticians, self-described environmentalists and scientists outside the “field” who have waxed lyrical on diverse environmental topics in occasionally best-selling books and movies.

“The morphing of environmental science to a ‘religion’ known as ‘environmentalism’ shows the distorted misinterpretation of science and the desperate means to communicate a fallacy,” says Tabone. She suggests that the same drivers underpin the attack and distortion of science in general particularly by conservative America. This is a nation she suggests that has seeded intelligent design as a pseudoscientific disguise for creationism and during the Bush era stifled on ludicrous religious and misguided moral grounds perhaps one of the most important areas of medicine – stem cell research.

This is heavy baggage for any educator to bring to the lecture theatre indeed.

“By today’s standards, simply teaching the environmental science textbook with sub-chapter titles such as ‘Oil dependence, terrorism, and global climate change’ would be frowned upon by [faculty management],” Tabone says. “Then, what topics are considered permissible and non-controversial? Must college instructors water down the curriculum and tip-toe through the textbook with fear of offending a student? Is ignoring the ‘elephant in the room’ fair to students who expect an enriched academic experience from lectures by field experts?”

Tabone told Sciencebase that, “Instructors live in fear of retribution from conservative-leaning students. It is like ‘walking on eggshells’ when discussing so-called controversial topics,” she says, “most instructors just avoid the whole area.” She adds that “Academic Freedom Bills” in the US might make it possible to punish instructors through legal measures. “It is ludicrous!” she says. “I have been teaching for the last six years and have ‘gotten away’ with discussing so-called controversial issues. I tell the students ‘nothing is taboo or off the table’ in my classroom. We are in academia,” she emphasises.

“Environmental science, formerly deemed as an ‘earth science’ with public health implications has evolved into a politically charged science branded as ‘controversial’ in some academic circles,” Tabone concludes. Much of the controversy lies in a lack of understanding of the scientific evidence on various sides of any debate, the nature of scientific discovery, which is not a bipolar, right-wrong endeavour, and the interventions of groups and organisations, activist, political and corporate, with a multitude of hidden agendas. But, there really isn’t anything controversial about environmental science, if the topics are taught with honesty, citing respectable sources and allowing probing questions, then the benefits of educating in this area far outweigh the risks of ignoring that environmental elephant.

Research Blogging IconChyrisse P. Tabone (2011). Environmental education under assault: can instructors teach environmental science without fear? Interdisciplinary Environmental Review, 12 (2), 146-153

Stop, you thieving scientist!

  • Stop, you thieving scientist! – All scientists are thieves. They're stealing money out of the pockets of the poor unsuspecting public. At least that’s what one commenter said recently in response to a post on giving up tenure. But, is there just one country out there that has weak, ineffectual central government, is making few investments in science, infrastructure and people, and that also has a good economy? Just one?

Selected from the latest science stories to hit DB’s virtual desktop @sciencebase.