Saahil Dhand Candidate no. - intr

To what extent should humans fear further advancement in Nanotechnology?
Although nanotechnology isn’t something you hear about every day, it is often useful to know a bit about it considering one day it could completely take over our lives and change the world as we know it. Nanotechnology refers to a field of research and innovation linked with ‘building things’ on a molecular and atomic scale. A nanometre is equivalent to one billionth of a meter and when we are dealing with such scales, the rules of physics and chemistry no longer apply. In turn, this will allow us to undergo “atomically precise engineering” which could have a positive impact on every one of us. Picture what we could do when we have carbon nanotubes (rolled up sheets or graphite that are 1000 times thinner than air) that are 100 times stronger than steel yet six times lighter. Nanotechnology may seem very futuristic, however it is not something that is new to us. We have already built many machines/materials that use nanoparticles (particles with a range of 1nm to 100nm), some of which include self-cleaning glass, swimming pool disinfectants, scratch resistant coatings and safer yet more effective lithium ion batteries. Now we are looking into using these nanoparticles for more serious issues, for example in curing cancer and developing more effective nuclear weapons. But is this something that we should worry about?
Much of nanoscience and many nanotechnologies are concerned with producing new or enhanced materials. The reason most nanotechnology researchers are so excited is mainly because they can reinforce materials to make them not only stronger, but also lighter. The products that we can get from this will have new electronic, optical and mechanical properties. One major example is graphene. It has unique properties, which allow it to conduct electricity despite its size, absorb a rather large 2.3% of white light, and is also one of the strongest materials in existence. You may be aware of graphene being used today in making batteries that recharge faster, low power-consumption electronic device display screens and many other appliances. But all of these are nothing compared to what scientists claim the future holds for graphene. There have been talks about a charger that gives your phone full battery in under 5 seconds, unbreakable phone screens and a graphene filter that makes every drop of water on the planet drinkable. In this sense we should not fear nanotechnology but look forward to what it might bring us in the future.
Nanotechnology can bring major advances in medicine, especially with the introduction of nanobots. These are essentially minute robots that can be injected into your body and controlled to steer through your blood stream, making repairs and also preventing infections. Surgeries could become much faster and more accurate and injuries could even be repaired cell-by-cell. This would provide the health industry with prime advantages that will not only increase our life span but also give us a better quality of life. One of the main reasons that nanotechnology has the recognition that it does today is because of the role it could potentially play in the fight against cancer, the disease that kills approximately 7.6 million people worldwide each year. Drug production could also be refined, making them at a molecular level. If scientists decide that they want to use nanotechnology to cure cancer, there are two ways in which the nano-drugs would be administered: nanobots being sent into the body to track down cancer cells or nanoparticles that inject chemotherapeutic chemicals directly into the cancer cells with minimal damage to the surrounding cells. If this were to work not only on cancer but also other diseases, we would be living in a world where almost nothing could harm us biologically. Nanotechnology has also been associated with the ability to heal wounds faster by sowing nanoparticles into bandages. However, since nanotechnology is fairly new to us, we do not yet fully know what it can do. We do know that all nanoparticles are miniscule, but this allows them to get into our skin. Once inside our bodies, we are completely oblivious to the fact that they are there and have no idea what they are doing. Recent studies have shown that, “nanoparticles can damage lung cells, suppress immunity and carry health risks similar to those posed by asbestos.” Nanotech has also been associated with a term by the name of ‘Grey Goo’. This is a “hypothetical end-of-the-world scenario involving molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating robots consume all matter on Earth while building more of themselves”. However unlikely and fictional this seems, it is a term that most people have used when describing the disadvantages of nanotechnology and a debated reason why we should definitely not use nanotechnology. Given these health risks and world ending possibilities, it is difficult to say how great of an influence nanotechnology will have on medicine.
Nanotechnology is beginning to have an impact on several aspects of food science from how food is grown to how it is packaged. Companies are developing nanomaterial that will make a difference not only in the taste of food but also food safety and the health benefits that they provide. For example, storage bins are being made with silver nanoparticles embedded in the plastic. These nanoparticles kill bacteria from any material that was previously stored in the bins and this reduces health risks from pathogens. You may have also heard about nanotechnology that companies use to get certain vitamins, minerals or antioxidants directly into your cells in more concentrated forms. Despite the benefits that these could potentially cause, it has been shown in some cases that ‘isolating certain cells, tissues or molecules and taking in concentrated forms of nutrition sets the body up for toxic effects.’ So now we are faced with a choice: save millions of lives with the addition of nutrients into the body but also risk the death of millions, or not introduce nanotechnology into food science at all.

The environment could also benefit from the use of nanotechnology. It could provide a solution for energy consumption, pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The technology effectively traps carbon dioxide and other pollutants so that they can be removed from the atmosphere and sometimes even recycled back into a production process. The beverage industry would probably benefit the most from this technology by using this recycled carbon dioxide. It can also be put to use for removing benzene from petrol vapour, reducing the probability of the vapour igniting and causing fires. A major concern regarding nanoparticles in the atmosphere is that they might not be detectable after being released due to their miniature nature. The last thing you would want is these particles inside your body that are not able to be removed and could harm or potentially kill you. Nanoparticles have also been found to have toxic effects on the human body when used in medicine. Releasing a toxic substance in the air could have the capability of killing millions and us not understanding enough about these particles makes it even worse if such a catastrophe were to happen. However, one could argue that because we are exposed to many kinds of nanoparticles that occur in nature and do not seem to have any negative health effects, it is likely that many of the new, man-made nanomaterials will be similarly harmless.
Nanotechnology will bring a whole new meaning to the word “security”. We know that it will definitely be used in warfare but we wont have any way of keeping track of who possesses nanotechnology and who doesn’t. Countries will be able to wage war against each other without ever letting the enemy know who is attacking them. Materials like nanoaluminium and nanothermite will allow us to create more powerful bombs that harness more energy hence producing a bigger explosion. Terrorists may be able to get their hands on some of these materials perhaps from the black market or other sources and will perform very deadly acts. Although nanotechnology being used in warfare on a large scale does not sound very appealing, it can help individuals much more by keeping us more safe. Nano cameras can be made to microscopic sizes with sensors that are able to follow movement or even contact authorities if there is a situation. If these cameras are ever put to use on such a large scale that everyone has them, there will be a huge decrease in the number of crimes and also deaths. One obvious disadvantage is privacy. Nanocams that many of us will be unaware of will open up new opportunities for governments and other individuals to invade privacy. They could be put absolutely anywhere due to their miniature nature and although it protects us from crimes, we will never know whether someone is watching us or not. If you are concerned about privacy now, it will only get worse in the future with the introduction and development of nanotechnology in this area.
In the midst of all these ideas, it is very difficult to decide on the negatives and positives of Nanotechnology. On one side, the Nanotechnology provides an amazing base for the world to advance in many of the key areas and on the other side, it itself poses as a potential risk by elaborating the possibilities of the destruction of the whole world.

Writing Commentary
I decided to write an article for a science magazine on the topic of nanotechnology entitled,’ To what extent should humans fear further advancement in nanotechnology’. After careful consideration of my sources and research, I decided to argue that on the one hand, nanotechnology provides,’ an amazing base for the world to advance in many key areas,’ whereas it also possesses,’ a potential risk by elaborating the possibilities of the destruction of the whole world.’
I began my article by simply explaining what nanotechnology was and discussing what areas it is being used in today. I thought this would be essential as nanotechnology is definitely not a topic that everyone knows about and so by simply explaining what it was, I would perhaps spark an interest in the subject as a whole. I tried to further this interest by making the reader familiar with some of the potential nanotechnology has, for example in curing cancer and developing more effective nuclear weapons. Using a rhetorical question at the end of the introduction that said,’ Is this something we should worry about’, simply laid down the base for what I was going to discuss for the rest of the essay.
The rest of the paragraphs save the conclusion were structurally very similar and had a range of language. To get the tone of my writing, I wanted to make the it as personal as possible by talking about how nanotechnology can directly affect our lives. I did this by using phrases like, “imagine”, “something we should”, “protects us” and “we are faced with a choice”. This would engage the reader as they would be eager to essentially find out what the future could hold for them. I also used a bit of sarcasm in my speech to try and engage the audience to a further extent, for example when talking about the effects of the so-called Grey Goo, I said that, “given these health risks and end-of-the-world scenarios”. I tried to make it seem as over-dramatic as possible and by doing this, it makes the piece slightly humorous.
At the start of each paragraph, I made it clear what the paragraph would be about by stating another factor the nanotechnology can effect. There are a lot of ideas discussed in the article and I wanted to make sure the reader knew which one he was reading about at all times. There are a few statistics given throughout the article for example when I wrote how many people a year are killed by cancer. By giving these shocking statistics, I hoped to draw an emotional response and portray the true extent of the damage that cancer has caused. This makes what I am talking about much more urgent and significant as I have said that nanotechnology can potentially cure cancer.
Throughout the piece, I made the question about us going forward with nanotechnology a choice. This would not only to engage the reader more, but also give the writing more meaning. If I said that we, as ordinary people, have no influence on nanotechnology progressing, it would make what I was saying pointless. In each paragraph I stated both pros and cons of nanotechnology that made the reader think about which one outweighs the other and hopefully they will come to a decision at the end. As a conclusion, I wanted to express that there is a clear balance between the pros and cons of the technology and also to say whether nanotechnology will be our savior or whether it will be to our detriment. I did this by stating the worst and best-case scenarios given that we will use nanotechnology a lot more in the not too distant future. In the conclusion I also aimed to simply to lay down the two sides for the argument,’ to what extent should humans fear further advancement in nanotechnology.’ I did not give my own opinion as I wanted to emphasize that it was a choice and that the reader should go with the side of the argument he/she finds more convincing.

Source Analysis
I wanted my sources to be primarily of an informative style as well as presenting a specific opinion on the future of nanotechnology. The aim of my article was to inform people about the potential but also the dangers of nanotechnology and by using opinionated and informative sources, I hoped to use ideas and arguments from them to make the reader familiar with my piece and by the end, develop a just opinion. To find my sources I solely looked on the internet as there were so many articles and websites with a load of information on my topic. One of the main reasons I went forward with this topic is because when I looked online, I was amazed at the variety of opinions made about nanotechnology and it would be interesting to see which ones outbalanced others.

The first source I chose to cite from was entitled, ’Nanobots’, and simply laid down the basic facts about nanobots including their size, their possible role in the future and also some of the dangers they could potentially cause. The information given was very useful and explained clearly some of the complicated terms used when talking about nanotechnology. The section which struck me most was where the writer was talking about ‘Grey Goo’. This is essentially a, ’hypothetical end-of-the- world scenario,’ where these nanobots go out of control. When I first read about this, I thought it was bizarre but having looked into further detail on the topic, Grey Goo plays a large role in why scientists are hesitant to make nanotechnology have a bigger impact on the world we live in today. The source itself was written by a blogger named Jack Hanson, who is solely responsible for the articles, editing and web design of FutureForAll.org. I assumed it would be reliable as it was written for a website purely for educating students. I however had doubts as it was clear that the blogger who wrote it was not very notable and so when I compared the information to other places and found that there was a clear match, I was assured that it was reliable and so used parts of it in my writing. I did think that the article may have been bias as it only gave us the disadvantages of nanobots and did not really go into much detail about its potential.

Bibliography
1. http://www.futureforall.org/nanotechnology/nanobots.html
2. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-06/oup-sas060909.php
3.http://www.motherearthnews.com/natural-health/nanotechnology-harmful-to-the-environment-and-our-bodies.aspx
4.http://www.wisdomsofhealth.com/nanotechnology_foods
5.http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/18/artificial-intelligence-nanotechnology-risks-human-civilisation