Will “blocking patents” delay nanotech advances, as has happened with biotechmedical advances?
Gina Miller writes "The ETC group has spoken publicly again. While presenting at the 4th World Conference of Science Journalists, director of ETC Pat Mooney stressed that nanotechnology needs to be addressed by the United Nations due to his concerns of economic upheaval and intellectual property issues. While Mr. Mooney states that his group is not against nanotechnology, he believes nanotechnologies will replace current market applications and thus widen the gap between the rich and the poor. There was no mention of the known ways that nanotechnology could be implemented to narrow this gap. This article was found at SciDev."
The ETC Group has a new 63-page PDF report out titled “Nanotech Rx — Medical Applications of Nano-scale Technologies: What Impact on Marginalized Communities?” Although we at Foresight share ETC’s concern for these communities, we disagree with the report. A couple of excerpts: Can OECD donors who have failed to deliver promised mosquito netting to… Continue reading Nanotechnology medicine policy report disputed
from the can-we-work-this-out? dept.
Three Nanodot readers wrote (see below) about The New York Times piece Opposition to Nanotechnology by Barnaby J. Feder, August 19, 2002, which reports that "nanotechnology is encountering the kind of real-world headwinds that have impeded biotechnology." The central focus of the article is the concerns of the ETC Group about nanoparticles in the environment penetrating living cells and accumulating in animal organs (see "Call for moratorium on commercial nanomaterials," Nanodot July 29, 2002).
