Friends of the Earth urteilen hart über Nano – berechtigterweise?
In einem Blog-Artikel analysiert Andrew Maynard, Direktor des Risk Science Center der Universität von Michigan School of Public Health, sechs evidenzbasierte Schlussfolgerungen, welche Friends of the Earth (FoE) verwendet um zu belegen, dass Nano-Sonnencremes gefährlich für den Menschen sind.
Maynard posts each FoE statement and critically examines the evidence the studies were based upon. He concludes that while each of the studies cited by FoE is scientifically interesting, none of them provide clear evidence that titanium dioxide or zinc oxide nanoparticles in sunscreen present a plausible risk to human health.
Maynard says "...the science is far from compelling in indicating that nanoparticles in sunscreens are a bad thing. In fact, the current state of the science suggests that nanoparticles in sunscreens stay on top of the skin rather than penetrating it, are an effective and long lasting barrier against Ultraviolet radiation from the sun if applied correctly, and avoid some of the health concerns associated with non-nano sunscreens. This is probably why another environment group – the Environmental Working Group (EWG) – recently recommended a range of nanoparticle-based sunscreens."
He calls upon FoE to answer the following question: "What is your worst case estimate of the human health risk from titanium dioxide and/or zinc oxide nanoparticles in sunscreens?" as a way to open up a reasonable discussion on the safety or otherwise of nanotechnology-enabled sunscreens.
Source: Meridian Nanotechnology & Development News
Blog Entry 2020 Science by Andrew Maynard: Link