Nanotechnology Lawyer & Attorney : Porter Wright Morris & Arthur : Nanotechnology Law Report - Germanium nanobead image provided by UT-Battelle, which manages Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the Department of Energy

While the full report goes into significant detail concerning questions and answers, some of the highlights are as follows (+/-3.1% margin of error):

• 7% of Americans have heard "a lot" about nanotechnology
• 17% of Americans have heard "some" about nanotechnology
• 26% have heard "just a little" about nanotechnology
• 49% have heard "nothing at all" about nanotechnology

That last figure is rather stunning to me.  Despite the number of products on the market and other instances of nanotechnology (even including Michael Crichton's Prey), still almost half of the American adult population has not heard of nanotechnology.  At all.  Further, the polling data reports that those who have heard "a lot" or "some" about nanotechnology has declined over the three years of polling (to 24% in 2008 from 27% in 2007 and 30% in 2006).

Not surprisingly, there seems to be a correlation between those who have a familiarity with nanotechnology and the beliefs as to the risks and benefits associated with it.  In short, the more one knows about nanotechnology, the more likely they are to believe that the benefits will outweigh the risks.  However, the largest group remains unsure as to the risks and benefits.

My concern, though, falls with the numbers highlighted above.  Regardless of what you think about the risks and benefits of nanotechnology, it is our responsibility, as those considering themselves "in the sector" to help educate the public.  A real, substantive discussion on nanotechnology cannot happen with 49% of the population ignorant of what it is.  The PEN poll is a useful tool for determining where we need to focus our efforts.  Clearly, we need to do a better job of engaging the public on these issues.

Throughout the report, the author addresses the unique, and in some cases, not so unique, concerns raised by using nanomaterials in food packaging, all through the use of hypothetical applications.  The purpose of the report is to "tee-up" the regulatory issues faced by the FDA, as the primary regulatory agency in charge of food packaging, and the EPA as a secondary regulating authority.  The report provided a broad based look at the issues raised by this specific nanomaterial application.

Like other areas of potential regulation, the use of nanomaterials in such close proximity to food raises its own concerns and potential.  Beyond the discussion raised by the paper itself, which are absolutely worth considering, it is encouraging to see the GMA involved in this study.  Because of the number of regulatory topics that are emerging, and each one seemingly unique to its own industry of application, it becomes critical for stakeholders to involve themselves in the debate.