Debunking some misconceptions about nanotoxicology.

Nanotechnology is currently undergoing an impressive expansion in material science research and development of systems that have novel properties due to their small size. Most of the research efforts have been focused on applications, while the implications efforts (i.e., environmental health and safety) have lagged behind. As a consequence, the success of nanotechnology will require assurances that the products being developed are safe from an environmental, health, and safety standpoint. These concerns have led to a debate among governmental agencies and advocacy groups on whether implementation of special regulations should be required for commercialization of products containing nanomaterials. Therefore the assessments of nanomaterial-related health risks must be accurate and verifiable. A mechanism for conducting well-designed toxicology studies includes rigorous attention to nanoparticle physicochemical characterization, as well as consideration of potential routes of exposure, justification of nanoparticle doses, and inclusion of benchmark controls. Unfortunately, some results obtained from earlier studies have fostered general perceptions and fears about nanoparticle health hazards-based mainly upon simple metrics such as particle size, surface area, and particle dose. In addition, there are currently held views that results of screening in silico or in vitro cell culture assays can serve as adequate screening substitutes for identifying health hazards. Some of these "misconceptions" should be challenged or confirmed by the implementation of thorough and accurately detailed nanotoxicology studies. In this article, the author briefly discusses some of the generalized "misconceptions" regarding nanomaterial toxicity and presents alternative views on these issues.