An emerging issue in the diagnosis and treatment of human biology is nanomedicine. Nanomedicine is quite simply the application of nanotechnology, a convergence of a multitude of disciplines such as applied physics, materials science and biomechanical interfacing, with the aim of manipulating matter on an atomic and molecular scale for the purposes of clinical therapy. Nanomedicine’s potential is broad and deep, ranging from oncological imaging to drug delivery, and as such has a nigh-infinite range of impact on the field of medicine.
Furthermore, the potential of nanomedicine taps into the fantasies of many a transhumanist by holding great promise in the realm of bio-augmentation. In “The potential and pitfalls of nanomedicine,” Cathy Garber discusses, along with some of potential applications of nanomedicine, the toxicological concerns and ethical considerations that may be critical in determining the successful adoption of nanomedicine.
Garber (2007) reports that nanomedicine applications can be quite specific: In the area of drug delivery, one can engineer drugs down to a nano scale and accomplish designs that can improve the bioavailability of the drug within the patient. In effect, the drug in question can be designed with cellular precision so that it its distribution within the patient’s anatomy is at its most effective. Also, the nano scale of nanomedicinal technology lends itself well to imaging within the field of oncology.
For example, research into fluorescent quantum dots is being directed towards their use in tandem with magnetic resonance imaging in order to identify the spread of tumors. Garber (2007) notes that concerns regarding toxicology exist: Operating on the molecular scale means that any possible oversights in nanomedicinal technology could lead to an interference in the natural biochemical systems and processes within the human body.
Furthermore, health and environmental problems could pose a dilemma to nanomedicinal design, as nano-particles that persist rather than degrade some time after their use in therapy or diagnosis may render them volatile to other individuals. In any case, whatever the diagnostic or therapeutic application of any nanomedicinal technology, what must ultimately be confronted by designers to address the above mentioned issues is how to craft nano particles that can remain safely within the human body without any harm or side effect, if not dissipate safely into the environment without any adverse effects on ecology or other individuals.
Ethics are also another concern for the nano medicinal future. Physicians and other specialists must be trained to recommend these technologies ethically, and policy groups must determine fairly what constitutes ‘ethical. ’ This means addressing issues of informed consent such as when and where consent for the use of nanomedicine is obtained and according to what terms it will be defined as ‘informed,’ given the complexity of the technology. These questions are not exclusive to nanomedicine, but remain of paramount importance.
Nanotechnology proponents, including proponents of nanomedicine, vary their predictions of when these tools will entire into ubiquity. Some assert that it could happen in the next two decades, and some in the next half-century. Regardless, it is critical for societies to determine responsible applications. The unfortunate fact of today’s technological developments is that they can scarcely be contained by regulation or geographical borders, and as such, their use is inevitable.
What is necessary then is for societies to standardize the moral and ethical concerns of its utilization and design, rather than oppose them outright, lest such technologies remain solely in the hands of individuals and groups with little to no ethical restraints.
Works Cited
Garber, Cathy. “The potential and pitfalls of nanomedicine. ” NanoWerk. 7 May 2007. Retrieved online on March 20, 2009 from: http://www. nanowerk. com/spotlight/spotid=1891. php