Nanotechnology Crossroads

SAGE Crossroads is an online forum for emerging issues of human aging. Launched in March 2003 by the Alliance for Aging Research and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (publishers of Science Magazine), SAGE Crossroads provides policymakers, journalists and interested consumers with the opportunity to explore the impact of science and technology on aging.

I've been asked to appear on their September 27 webcast, together with Mihail Roco, head of the U.S. National Nanotechnoly Initiative. Here is our topic:

The power of molecular manufacturing – Nanotechnology – is huge. It has the potential to slow, stop, prevent or reverse aging. Yet, some fear that exploration in Nanotechnology may backfire and become a means of mass destruction. Is there a way to tap into the power of Nanotechnology without opening diabolical Pandora’s Box?

It should be an interesting discussion.

Mike Treder

Comments

[jim moore]

Mike.
I think that the most honest answer to the question is NO, we can't have advanced nanotech without great danger.

[Mike Deering]

We are moving into a new and different environment with the development of fully functional nanotechnology. Human beings are specialized to survive in the current environment, not the new environment. Selection pressure will give rise to new different forms of beings. In nature, the rule when confronted with radical changes in environment is "adapt or perish". We are not exempt from this rule.

[Karl Gallagher]

Heck, we're not specialized for the current environment. We're still adapted to being hunter-gatherers. Lots of current problems are caused by how human reflexes are incompatible with the modern environment (the difficulties with handling strangers is probably the worst). The Blank Slate should be essential reading when assessing potential changes in society.

[Todd Andersen]

Hello everyone, I am curious to know roughly how many individuals read these comments I see many reoccurring names on the list of individuals writing comments. I would be interested in knowing who is reading the comments. It should be noted I am not directly affiliated with CRN and have only been writing on the site for a few weeks.

But nonetheless if you could take just a moment and sign in a "hello" I would be interested in the response

Thanks again and I look forward to both reading and adding to the discussion.

Todd Andersen
Thornton, Iowa USA

[Mike Treder, CRN]

FYI – We don't have any way of knowing who is viewing unless they leave a comment. Currently we are getting from 500 up to 2000 "hits" per day on our blog. However, each time an individual viewer clicks on a new page, that registers as a hit, so the total number of discrete visitors is somewhat lower.

[Mark]

I have not commented in a long while, but I still read almost every thread in its entirety.

I can loosly compare nanotech with say, the automobile (but on a much grander scale of course). There is no way to use the car and not have to deal with all the dangers involved with fast moving large metal objects. CRN is trying to come up with regulations just like a speed limit, assigned roads, traffic lights, seat belt laws, ect. These are all things that we need, so that we structure behind nanotech. Will a speed limit stop someone from speeding, no but it helps.
I am all for regulation, and in all honesty am more willing to trust a democratic government (however corrupt) than the residence of an apartment complex that gets the police called on them every other day.
But I am preparing a response to policy for another thread, so I'll leave it at that.