Nanomaterials are engineered structures with at least one dimension of 100 nanometers or less. These materials are increasingly being used for commercial purposes such as fillers, opacifiers, catalysts, semiconductors, cosmetics, microelectronics, and drug carriers. Materials in this size range may approach the length scale at which some specific physical or chemical interactions with their environment can occur. As a result, their properties differ substantially from those bulk materials of the same composition, allowing them to perform exceptional feats of conductivity, reactivity, and optical sensitivity. Possible undesirable results of these capabilities are harmful interactions with biological systems and the environment, with the potential to generate toxicity. The establishment of principles and test procedures to ensure safe manufacture and use of nanomaterials in the marketplace is urgently required and achievable.

/pdf/toxic-potential-of-materials-at-the-nanolevel-qmfpjzjasp.pdf

Toxic Potential of Materials at the Nanolevel

Air pollution and health.

This review is written with the goal of informing public health concerns related to nanoscience, while raising awareness of nanomaterials toxicity among scientists and manufacturers handling them. We show that humans have always been exposed to nanoparticles and dust from natural sources and human activities, the recent development of industry and combustion-based engine transportation profoundly increasing anthropogenic nanoparticulate pollution. The key to understanding the toxicity of nanoparticles is that their minute size, smaller than cells and cellular organelles, allows them to penetrate these basic biological structures, disrupting their normal function. Among diseases associated with nanoparticles are asthma, bronchitis, lung cancer, neurodegenerative diseases (such as Parkinson`s and Alzheimer`s diseases), Crohn`s disease, colon cancer. Nanoparticles that enter the circulatory system are related to occurrence of arteriosclerosis, and blood clots, arrhythmia, heart diseases, and ultimately cardiac death. We show that possible adverse effects of nanoparticles on human health depend on individual factors such as genetics and existing disease, as well as exposure, and nanoparticle chemistry, size, shape, and agglomeration state. The faster we will understand their causes and mechanisms, the more likely we are to find cures for diseases associated with nanoparticle exposure. We foresee a future with better-informed, and hopefully more cautious manipulation of engineered nanomaterials, as well as the development of laws and policies for safely managing all aspects of nanomaterial manufacturing, industrial and commercial use, and recycling.

Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: Sources and toxicity

This review is presented as a common foundation for scientists interested in nanoparticles, their origin, activity, and biological toxicity. It is written with the goal of rationalizing and informing public health concerns related to this sometimes-strange new science of “nano,” while raising awareness of nanomaterials’ toxicity among scientists and manufacturers handling them. We show that humans have always been exposed to tiny particles via dust storms, volcanic ash, and other natural processes, and that our bodily systems are well adapted to protect us from these potentially harmful intruders. The reticuloendothelial system, in particular, actively neutralizes and eliminates foreign matter in the body, including viruses and nonbiological particles. Particles originating from human activities have existed for millennia, e.g., smoke from combustion and lint from garments, but the recent development of industry and combustion-based engine transportation has profoundly increased anthropogenic particulate pollution. Significantly, technological advancement has also changed the character of particulate pollution, increasing the proportion of nanometer-sized particles-“nanoparticles”-and expanding the variety of chemical compositions. Recent epidemiological studies have shown a strong correlation between particulate air pollution levels, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, various cancers, and mortality. Adverse effects of nanoparticles on human health depend on individual factors such as genetics and existing disease, as well as exposure, and nanoparticle chemistry, size, shape, agglomeration state, and electromagnetic properties. Animal and human studies show that inhaled nanoparticles are less efficiently removed than larger particles by the macrophage clearance mechanisms in the lungs, causing lung damage, and that nanoparticles can translocate through the circulatory, lymphatic, and nervous systems to many tissues and organs, including the brain. The key to understanding the toxicity of nanoparticles is that their minute size, smaller than cells and cellular organelles, allows them to penetrate these basic biological structures, disrupting their normal function. Examples of toxic effects include tissue inflammation, and altered cellular redox balance toward oxidation, causing abnormal function or cell death. The manipulation of matter at the scale of atoms, “nanotechnology,” is creating many new materials with characteristics not always easily predicted from current knowledge. Within the nearly limitless diversity of these materials, some happen to be toxic to biological systems, others are relatively benign, while others confer health benefits. Some of these materials have desirable characteristics for industrial applications, as nanostructured materials often exhibit beneficial properties, from UV absorbance in sunscreen to oil-less lubrication of motors. A rational science-based approach is needed to minimize harm caused by these materials, while supporting continued study and appropriate industrial development. As current knowledge of the toxicology of “bulk” materials may not suffice in reliably predicting toxic forms of nanoparticles, ongoing and expanded study of “nanotoxicity” will be necessary. For nanotechnologies with clearly associated health risks, intelligent design of materials and devices is needed to derive the benefits of these new technologies while limiting adverse health impacts. Human exposure to toxic nanoparticles can be reduced through identifying creation-exposure pathways of toxins, a study that may someday soon unravel the mysteries of diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. Reduction in fossil fuel combustion would have a large impact on global human exposure to nanoparticles, as would limiting deforestation and desertification. While nanotoxicity is a relatively new concept to science, this review reveals the result of life’s long history of evolution in the presence of nanoparticles, and how the human body, in particular, has adapted to defend itself against nanoparticulate intruders.

https://avs.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1116/1.2815690

The rapid proliferation of many different engineered nanomaterials (defined as materials designed and produced to have structural features with at least one dimension of 100 nanometers or less) presents a dilemma to regulators regarding hazard identification. The International Life Sciences Institute Research Foundation/Risk Science Institute convened an expert working group to develop a screening strategy for the hazard identification of engineered nanomaterials. The working group report presents the elements of a screening strategy rather than a detailed testing protocol. Based on an evaluation of the limited data currently available, the report presents a broad data gathering strategy applicable to this early stage in the development of a risk assessment process for

/pdf/principles-for-characterizing-the-potential-human-health-28mkllrnbm.pdf

Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy.

Background: Ultrafine particles have been hypothesised to be an important contributing factor in the toxicity and adverse health effects of particulate air pollution (PM10) and nanoparticles are used increasingly in industrial processes. 

Aims: To compare the ability of ultrafine and fine particles of titanium dioxide and carbon black to induce inflammation, cause epithelial injury, and affect the alveolar macrophage clearance functions of phagocytosis and chemotaxis in vivo. 

Methods: Rats were instilled with fine and ultrafine carbon black and titanium dioxide. Inflammation was quantified by bronchoalveolar lavage; the ability of the macrophages to phagoytose indictor fluorescent beads and to migrate towards aC5a were determined. 

Results: Ultrafine particles induced more PMN recruitment, epithelial damage, and cytotoxicity than their fine counterparts, exposed at equal mass. Both ultrafine and fine particles significantly impaired the phagocytic ability of alveolar macrophages. Only ultrafine particle treatment significantly enhanced the sensitivity of alveolar macrophages to chemotact towards C5a. 

Conclusions: Ultrafine particles of two very different materials induced inflammation and epithelial damage to a greater extent than their fine counterparts. In general, the effect of ultrafine carbon black was greater than ultrafine titanium dioxide, suggesting that there are differences in the likely harmfulness of different types of ultrafine particle. Epithelial injury and toxicity were associated with the development of inflammation after exposure to ultrafines. Increased sensitivity to a C5a chemotactic gradient could make the ultrafine exposed macrophages more likely to be retained in the lungs, so allowing dose to accumulate.

https://oem.bmj.com/content/oemed/61/5/442.full.pdf

Increased inflammation and altered macrophage chemotactic responses caused by two ultrafine particle types

https://www.rachel.org/files/document/Impairment_of_Alveolar_Macrophage_Phagocytosis.pdf

L.C. Renwick

Papers

Increased inflammation and altered macrophage chemotactic responses caused by two ultrafine particle types

Impairment of alveolar macrophage phagocytosis by ultrafine particles.

Education: Ultrafine Particles

Stimulation of Phagocytosis by Ultrafine Particles: Reply