It is commonly acknowledged that technology has made our lives a whole lot easier. In fact, technology has significantly improved our standard of living by supplying us with better communication, faster and safer travel, more effective medical care, and more. But nowadays, it seems that technology has begun to shrink. While it may not sound very logical, with this rapidly shrinking technology, nanotechnology, we will not only be able to help ourselves, but save ourselves as well.
In the most technical terms, nanotechnology is the study of the controlling of matter on an atomic and molecular scale. Although nanomaterials have been in use since the 1990s, scientists are currently engineering extremely small robotic devices, nanobots, which have the potential to revolutionize the field of medicine by 2015. Nanotechnology could help doctors effectively diagnose, treat and cure patients because nanobots can retrieve intimate images from within the body and perform complicated procedures that doctors are not humanly capable of doing. Patient aftercare could also be improved with nanobots that are able to regulate the delivery of a drug to the patient as well as allow the patient to monitor their own body systems (“Nanotechnology and Medicine”). These new abilities guarantee “a quantum leap in our medical capabilities” says Ralph C. Merkle, researcher of nanotechnology and author of “It’s a Small, Small, Small World” (n.p.). Given that there is no end to the possibilities nanotechnology offers for the betterment of the health of the human race, it seems there is no possible way this new technology could fail us.
Imagine a time when cancer treatments could ensure a patient’s full recovery, a person with a debilitating spinal cord injury would walk and a disease could be prevented before it became a threat. Imagine that the effects of aging could be completely reversed and broken bones could be healed in a matter of hours. Although these may seem like a doctor’s and patient’s wildest dream, with the further development of nanotechnology, these dreams could become a reality.
The issue with nanotechnology is that its development cannot be either beneficial or detrimental to humans. Some critics have expressed their concerns with the more sinister potential these nanobots have to offer despite the strides nanotechnology has made to improve the effectiveness of modern medicine. Critics fear that where there is a way to heal, there is always many ways in which to hurt. “The safest way forward,” says Robert D. Pinson., author of “Is Nanotechnology Prohibited By Biological and Chemical Conventions”, “is to develop the technology and work to prevent accidents and misuse…with a regulatory scheme in place to provide guidance and ensure safety” (289-290). Like all technology, nanotechnology’s main problem is that it is manufactured by human beings who have demonstrated infinite capabilities for both good and evil. We must consider the risks of developing a technology to use for good that, with a bit of tweaking, could easily be used for evil. Nanobots could guarantee that we sustain human life for a very long time, but, like with all technologies, if nanobots fell into the wrong hands, all of humanity could be in danger. As Sherri Chasin Calvo, a freelance science writer specializing in genetics has stated, “nanotechnology can be a double-edged sword” (n.p).
Imagine a time when a bioterrorism attack could be completely successful because the terrorists have programmed nanobots to deliver poison that avoids the body’s defenses and not attack the terrorists. Imagine that nanobots become so advanced that they could self-replicate until they formed an elite army of super humans. Imagine that scientists engineer nanobots as lethal weapons or that doctors could harvest and spread disease with nanobots instead of preventing and curing disease. And again, although these may sound like the wildest dreams of science fiction novelists, the development of advanced nanotechnology opens the door to these ominous possibilities.
Taking both the advantages and disadvantages of nanotechnology into mind, I believe, that the advantages of nanotechnology in medicine are numerous enough to outweigh the disadvantages if the proper procedural steps are taken and the rules are enforced. Completely halting the nanotechnology would be unreasonable because technological development would be at a standstill with no onward movement to embrace, as Jamais Cascio in “Get Smarter” says, “our ability to build the future we want” (8). Also, abstaining from further research and work on nanotechnology in one country would not guarantee that other countries will discontinue their work. Giving scientists the ability to work freely with nanotechnology is not an ideal solution either. “Nanotechnology could have an enormous impact on medicine but the regulations that govern new drugs and medical devices need to be updated before nanomedicine can be commercialized,” says Michael N. Helmus, the senior vice president for Biopharma at Advance Nanotech (333). Indeed, current regulations do not apply to nanotechnologies that can be considered either a drug or a device, or a hybrid of both. Also, the social and ethical issues raised by nanotechnology transcend the current environmental and medical regulations (Mehta). New regulations must encompass the all issues and abilities of nanotechnology.
Guidelines for nanotechnology development will prevent the nanobots from becoming a threat to the public. Ideally, the designers of the nanobots would make certain that the nanobots could not self-replicate or be susceptible to changes in their blueprint. These policies and guidelines, however, will not be easy to establish and enforce. Obtaining absolute cooperation from every government in the world, finalizing the new laws, and hiring enforcers to see that international laws are followed before 2015 arrives will be difficult. Also, because nanotechnology applies to other fields beside medicine, regulations will have to be formed specifically to each field. Despite these obstacles, organizations such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development have formed groups, such as the Working Group on Manufactured Nanomaterials, to respond to the need for specific regulations for nanotechnology. In addition, countries such as the United States, Japan, Australia, and Canada, are currently regulating nanotechnology with the help of traditional environmental policies while beginning to debate new legislation (Ecotoxicology, 1328). If new regulations can effectively prevent the abuse of nanotechnology, I see no reason why we cannot reap the benefits of nanotechnology and remain confident of its safe use and application.
The importance of nanotechnology in medicine is that it can save a life. I find that as someone who may require medical care in the future or may know someone else in dire need of medicine, the potential that nanotechnology offers to the field of medicine is difficult to deny. Now is the time that we must decide our own fate. Should we do all that is possible to save lives? Or are the possible deadly consequences too much for us to handle?
Cascio describes the human race as an evolving and intelligent species with the ability to use technology for our own benefit. He establishes that “with augmented intelligence, we will have a far greater appreciation for the consequences of our actions” (7). Perhaps with this new appreciation and with the proper regulations in place, all of society will use nanotechnology for its benefits despite other possible uses. In the end, we must rely on own species and our own choices, for while nanotechnology may be the sword, it will be the human beings who decide which way to swing the blade.
Works Cited
Calvo, Sherri Chasin, Peter Andrews, and M.C. Nagel. "Do the potential dangers of nanotechnology to society outweigh the potential benefits ." Science in Dispute 1 Jan. 2002: n. pag. Web.
Cascio, Jamais. "Get Smarter." the Atlantic 2009: 1-8. Print.
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety Volume 72, Issue 5, July 2009, Pages 1327-1330.
Helmus, Michael N. "The need for rules and regulations." Nature Nanotechnology 2 (2007): 333-334. Web.
Mehta, Michael D. "The Future of Nanomedicine Looks Promising, But Only If We Learn From the Past." Health Law Review (2003): n. pag. Web.
Merkle, Ralph C. "Nanotechnology: It's a Small, Small, Small, Small World." actionbioscience.org. American Institute of Biological Sciences, 2010. Web.
"Nanotechnology and Medicine." The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. Processwire, 2010. Web.
Pinson, Robert D. "Is Nanotechnology Prohibited by the Biological and Chemical Weapons Conventions." Berkeley Journal of Internaltional Law 22.279 (2004): 279-309. Web.
No comments:
Post a Comment