sweating the small stuff
by：Kenwei
2019-09-12
Nanotechnology in food is usually concerned about its potential benefits, but could it be toxic?
Investigation by Michael Laro.
It seems like a fantasy for Willie Wonka, but now food companies are using nanotechnology to make a variety of strange products.
Milk boxes that glow when the contents of the milk become sour. A sinful-tasting, non-fat ice-
Rich in fiber, protein and nutritious cream.
Even programmable soft drinks (
Just choose the taste, pull the label).
This miracle is still under development, but from antibacterial sponges to iron, engineered nanoparticles have been used worldwide
Fortified infant formula
Nanotechnology is the manipulation of substances on a very small scale.
Human hair is 80,000 nanometers wide.
A nano-particle is only 100 nanometers wide.
The scientists were completely fascinated by them.
Many people use phrases such as \"new toolbox\" and \"bigger than the industrial revolution\" when talking about their potential.
The reason is that, compared to large particles of the same substance, nanoparticles are usually expressed in strange and wonderful ways.
Unfortunately, this could risk them.
Who knows the nano-
In humans, iron particles of the size react?
Can they slip past the barrier of the brain?
Or they can be the godsend of iron. Women with defects?
In addition, food manufacturers do not have to tell consumers or regulators whether their products contain nanoparticles.
No one can determine which foods in Australia contain engineering nano-materials (if any)
A survey found only one brand
A series of fitness supplements made from Advanced Sports Nutrition
Claims to contain nano-materials).
There are very few rigorous studies on the effects of nanoparticles on humans, and most laboratory studies examine particles that are inhaled or injected instead of consumed.
However, early tests have raised concerns.
In 2004, a drug scientist found that the big black fish was exposed to carbon-containing water.
Nano-based materials, known as \"buckyballs\", suffered brain damage.
When a chemist exposed the lab
The human skin and liver cells were cultured into a weaker solution and half of the cells died.
Meanwhile, researchers at the University of Cambridge claim that carbon nanoparticles can penetrate the core of human cells and potentially destroy DNA. So what?
Producers don\'t dust carbon in our breakfast grains.
Using non-stretching, right?
Condemning food research on nano-foods?
That\'s the problem, critics say.
On the nano scale, many substances are more toxic.
Even become toxic at nano scale.
Why are there any differences in nanoparticles in food or food packaging?
It is these concerns that have prompted friends of the Earth to call for the suspension of all nano materials in food until Nano
Specific testing procedures and laws have been developed.
The organization insists that nano-materials should be regulated as new substances, even in large-
Good size peers-known.
Mandatory labels must be introduced.
These calls echo the calls of an increasing number of scientists and consumer action groups around the world.
Royal Society of England-
The oldest scientific organization in the world
Nano has been called
Treat small and small particles of all chemicals as new substances and conduct a comprehensive safety assessment and mandatory labeling.
In the United States, the consumer union wants all the Nano
Food ingredients-
Even those that have been approved for use as larger particles
New additives.
It also called for mandatory labeling.
However, the risk of human health is not the only concern.
If it becomes easier and cheaper to transport perishable foods, we can see an increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
Who knows what impact the nanoparticles will have once they enter our landfill and waterways?
Paradoxically, these particles with stronger absorption capacity may lead to malnutrition.
\"If we have a whole range of nutrients
Miller, Georgia, said: \"The fortified \'superfood\' is almost free of sugar, salt or fat, but tastes the same as texture, and we risk people eating less fresh food
Coordinator of Friends of Earth Australia.
\"We don\'t have a perfect understanding of why food is good for us.
Think we can take it apart and put it back on the nano scale to make it healthier
To be honest, this is a bit of a lie.
Miller is more skeptical about how nano-foods can feed millions of hungry people.
\"Genetically engineered foods are advertised as feeding hungry children, but the products it offers are designed to increase the anti-herbicide capacity of northern plants,\" she said . \".
\"Now products with nano-materials in the market are targeting a rich diet --
Conscious consumers and cater to their fear of bacteria.
Miller compiled a global list of such products.
Diet tea, fitness supplements and resistance in about 100
Bacterial chopping board, it\'s hard for African villagers to find anything to be thankful.
But do they really contain nanoparticles?
Almost no nano
Miller relies on the manufacturer\'s marketing proposition that there are specific regulations anywhere in the world.
Legal experts stress that there is no guarantee that a product contains nano-materials simply because it claims to contain nano-materials.
Given the time and cost of scientifically testing these claims to be almost insurmountable, no one can determine.
What is more difficult is that there is no universally accepted definition of nanoparticles.
Most scientists believe there is at least one dimension to nanoparticles.
Width, length or depth-
Less than 100 nm.
Others say that the particles below 300 nanometers are basically the same.
However, at a recent food conference in Europe, a group of manufacturers claimed that the real nanoparticles are nanoparticles with all three dimensions of less than 100 nm.
The definition of this rubber allows manufacturers to use nanoparticles when they are suitable for them, but denies their presence when they are not suitable.
According to the Australian distributor of senior sports nutrition, customers claim less stomach discomfort compared to other brands and have not reported adverse effects.
Of course, the reason we know this is because the company promotes its Nano advantage on its website and product packaging.
But given the lack of nanotechnology
We don\'t know the specific laws. if any -
Other foods in Australia contain nanoparticles.
Epicure contacted several major food manufacturers to ask if they were using the technology.
Most people insist that their products do not contain nano-materials, and they do not have a plan to introduce Nano-materials.
PepsiCo has signed a partnership with an Australian company that is currently developing nanotechnology food applications, according to Epicure, but declined to comment.
A spokeswoman for the Australian New Zealand Food Standards company said the regulator was \"unaware and unaware. . .
In any commercial sale of food developed in Australia using nanotechnology \". (
Exercise supplements are regulated by the therapeutic supplies authority, which does not have nanometers
Specific provisions. )
However, the spokesman added that \"all food sold must be safe \".
\"All food is safe because it has to be safe? \" says Miller.
\"This does not actually solve the vulnerability.
\"She was more critical of FSANZ\'s chief executive Steve mcachuan\'s recent speech to a group of food manufacturers.
\"This is one of the cases. . .
Where the food industry has to help us, \"says McCutcheon. \"You know the (nanotechnology).
You know your plan is to introduce it to the food supply department.
Please believe us and give us a little confidence-up.
\"Please,\" Miller sneered. \"A heads-up?
He basically said, \"tell us if the product is not safe so we know if we should ensure the safety of the product \".
A spokeswoman for FSANZ defended McCutcheon\'s comments, claiming that they were \"designed to encourage the food industry to discuss with FSANZ the use of nanotechnology in food and to determine whether a risk assessment is required, to ensure that the food produced is in compliance with the code or, if changes are required, a strong regulatory arrangement for \"that\" to ensure food safety (are in place)\".
For Miller, this merely emphasizes the need for urgent action.
Others are not sure.
\"There are some dangers of excessive use.
Regulation, \"said Brian pristrley, director of the human health risk assessment center in Australia and chairman of the National Commission for Health and Medical Research on nanotechnology and health advisory committee.
\"We can see some progress being killed.
The potential benefits are enormous.
Scientists have developed a Nano
Treatment for cancer cells in mice, but does not seem to hurt the surrounding cells.
Others have talked about the potential to significantly improve the efficiency of solar panels.
\"I don\'t support suspension or nano
Specific provisions . \"
When people say we\'re playing catch-up
In terms of the regulation of this technology, there may be a reasonable basis for this.
But I think the government and the regulatory authorities are working on these issues.
They respond in an appropriate way.
But maybe not fast enough.
The federal government has signed up for the Australian safety and Compensation Commission to review the safety of nanotechnology issue with zoologist Sam broussi insisting that it must be suspended immediately.
He said: \"One of my main suggestions is that because nanoparticles have essentially different properties than their volume equivalents, they should be treated as separate entities in terms of processing and regulation.
\"My position is very clear: they should be banned before we have the necessary regulations to assess their toxicity --
Especially anything you want to eat.
\"Brussels insists that the key is that there is no evidence of danger that is not the same as the proof of security.
\"The fact that we were talking about this even early in technology shows that humans are becoming smarter,\" he said . \".
\"50 years ago, you wouldn\'t have this conversation with things like dioxin, pesticides or asbestos.
People just say, \'Oh, they\'re safe, of course.
\"But if you say you don\'t have any evidence of harm, the next logical question is, \'Did you look at it? \'? \' \'\'www. foe. org.
Investigation by Michael Laro.
It seems like a fantasy for Willie Wonka, but now food companies are using nanotechnology to make a variety of strange products.
Milk boxes that glow when the contents of the milk become sour. A sinful-tasting, non-fat ice-
Rich in fiber, protein and nutritious cream.
Even programmable soft drinks (
Just choose the taste, pull the label).
This miracle is still under development, but from antibacterial sponges to iron, engineered nanoparticles have been used worldwide
Fortified infant formula
Nanotechnology is the manipulation of substances on a very small scale.
Human hair is 80,000 nanometers wide.
A nano-particle is only 100 nanometers wide.
The scientists were completely fascinated by them.
Many people use phrases such as \"new toolbox\" and \"bigger than the industrial revolution\" when talking about their potential.
The reason is that, compared to large particles of the same substance, nanoparticles are usually expressed in strange and wonderful ways.
Unfortunately, this could risk them.
Who knows the nano-
In humans, iron particles of the size react?
Can they slip past the barrier of the brain?
Or they can be the godsend of iron. Women with defects?
In addition, food manufacturers do not have to tell consumers or regulators whether their products contain nanoparticles.
No one can determine which foods in Australia contain engineering nano-materials (if any)
A survey found only one brand
A series of fitness supplements made from Advanced Sports Nutrition
Claims to contain nano-materials).
There are very few rigorous studies on the effects of nanoparticles on humans, and most laboratory studies examine particles that are inhaled or injected instead of consumed.
However, early tests have raised concerns.
In 2004, a drug scientist found that the big black fish was exposed to carbon-containing water.
Nano-based materials, known as \"buckyballs\", suffered brain damage.
When a chemist exposed the lab
The human skin and liver cells were cultured into a weaker solution and half of the cells died.
Meanwhile, researchers at the University of Cambridge claim that carbon nanoparticles can penetrate the core of human cells and potentially destroy DNA. So what?
Producers don\'t dust carbon in our breakfast grains.
Using non-stretching, right?
Condemning food research on nano-foods?
That\'s the problem, critics say.
On the nano scale, many substances are more toxic.
Even become toxic at nano scale.
Why are there any differences in nanoparticles in food or food packaging?
It is these concerns that have prompted friends of the Earth to call for the suspension of all nano materials in food until Nano
Specific testing procedures and laws have been developed.
The organization insists that nano-materials should be regulated as new substances, even in large-
Good size peers-known.
Mandatory labels must be introduced.
These calls echo the calls of an increasing number of scientists and consumer action groups around the world.
Royal Society of England-
The oldest scientific organization in the world
Nano has been called
Treat small and small particles of all chemicals as new substances and conduct a comprehensive safety assessment and mandatory labeling.
In the United States, the consumer union wants all the Nano
Food ingredients-
Even those that have been approved for use as larger particles
New additives.
It also called for mandatory labeling.
However, the risk of human health is not the only concern.
If it becomes easier and cheaper to transport perishable foods, we can see an increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
Who knows what impact the nanoparticles will have once they enter our landfill and waterways?
Paradoxically, these particles with stronger absorption capacity may lead to malnutrition.
\"If we have a whole range of nutrients
Miller, Georgia, said: \"The fortified \'superfood\' is almost free of sugar, salt or fat, but tastes the same as texture, and we risk people eating less fresh food
Coordinator of Friends of Earth Australia.
\"We don\'t have a perfect understanding of why food is good for us.
Think we can take it apart and put it back on the nano scale to make it healthier
To be honest, this is a bit of a lie.
Miller is more skeptical about how nano-foods can feed millions of hungry people.
\"Genetically engineered foods are advertised as feeding hungry children, but the products it offers are designed to increase the anti-herbicide capacity of northern plants,\" she said . \".
\"Now products with nano-materials in the market are targeting a rich diet --
Conscious consumers and cater to their fear of bacteria.
Miller compiled a global list of such products.
Diet tea, fitness supplements and resistance in about 100
Bacterial chopping board, it\'s hard for African villagers to find anything to be thankful.
But do they really contain nanoparticles?
Almost no nano
Miller relies on the manufacturer\'s marketing proposition that there are specific regulations anywhere in the world.
Legal experts stress that there is no guarantee that a product contains nano-materials simply because it claims to contain nano-materials.
Given the time and cost of scientifically testing these claims to be almost insurmountable, no one can determine.
What is more difficult is that there is no universally accepted definition of nanoparticles.
Most scientists believe there is at least one dimension to nanoparticles.
Width, length or depth-
Less than 100 nm.
Others say that the particles below 300 nanometers are basically the same.
However, at a recent food conference in Europe, a group of manufacturers claimed that the real nanoparticles are nanoparticles with all three dimensions of less than 100 nm.
The definition of this rubber allows manufacturers to use nanoparticles when they are suitable for them, but denies their presence when they are not suitable.
According to the Australian distributor of senior sports nutrition, customers claim less stomach discomfort compared to other brands and have not reported adverse effects.
Of course, the reason we know this is because the company promotes its Nano advantage on its website and product packaging.
But given the lack of nanotechnology
We don\'t know the specific laws. if any -
Other foods in Australia contain nanoparticles.
Epicure contacted several major food manufacturers to ask if they were using the technology.
Most people insist that their products do not contain nano-materials, and they do not have a plan to introduce Nano-materials.
PepsiCo has signed a partnership with an Australian company that is currently developing nanotechnology food applications, according to Epicure, but declined to comment.
A spokeswoman for the Australian New Zealand Food Standards company said the regulator was \"unaware and unaware. . .
In any commercial sale of food developed in Australia using nanotechnology \". (
Exercise supplements are regulated by the therapeutic supplies authority, which does not have nanometers
Specific provisions. )
However, the spokesman added that \"all food sold must be safe \".
\"All food is safe because it has to be safe? \" says Miller.
\"This does not actually solve the vulnerability.
\"She was more critical of FSANZ\'s chief executive Steve mcachuan\'s recent speech to a group of food manufacturers.
\"This is one of the cases. . .
Where the food industry has to help us, \"says McCutcheon. \"You know the (nanotechnology).
You know your plan is to introduce it to the food supply department.
Please believe us and give us a little confidence-up.
\"Please,\" Miller sneered. \"A heads-up?
He basically said, \"tell us if the product is not safe so we know if we should ensure the safety of the product \".
A spokeswoman for FSANZ defended McCutcheon\'s comments, claiming that they were \"designed to encourage the food industry to discuss with FSANZ the use of nanotechnology in food and to determine whether a risk assessment is required, to ensure that the food produced is in compliance with the code or, if changes are required, a strong regulatory arrangement for \"that\" to ensure food safety (are in place)\".
For Miller, this merely emphasizes the need for urgent action.
Others are not sure.
\"There are some dangers of excessive use.
Regulation, \"said Brian pristrley, director of the human health risk assessment center in Australia and chairman of the National Commission for Health and Medical Research on nanotechnology and health advisory committee.
\"We can see some progress being killed.
The potential benefits are enormous.
Scientists have developed a Nano
Treatment for cancer cells in mice, but does not seem to hurt the surrounding cells.
Others have talked about the potential to significantly improve the efficiency of solar panels.
\"I don\'t support suspension or nano
Specific provisions . \"
When people say we\'re playing catch-up
In terms of the regulation of this technology, there may be a reasonable basis for this.
But I think the government and the regulatory authorities are working on these issues.
They respond in an appropriate way.
But maybe not fast enough.
The federal government has signed up for the Australian safety and Compensation Commission to review the safety of nanotechnology issue with zoologist Sam broussi insisting that it must be suspended immediately.
He said: \"One of my main suggestions is that because nanoparticles have essentially different properties than their volume equivalents, they should be treated as separate entities in terms of processing and regulation.
\"My position is very clear: they should be banned before we have the necessary regulations to assess their toxicity --
Especially anything you want to eat.
\"Brussels insists that the key is that there is no evidence of danger that is not the same as the proof of security.
\"The fact that we were talking about this even early in technology shows that humans are becoming smarter,\" he said . \".
\"50 years ago, you wouldn\'t have this conversation with things like dioxin, pesticides or asbestos.
People just say, \'Oh, they\'re safe, of course.
\"But if you say you don\'t have any evidence of harm, the next logical question is, \'Did you look at it? \'? \' \'\'www. foe. org.
Custom message
