NANO-particles may affect DNA

[real6]

http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article739720.ece

Danish research suggests that some nano-particles may cause cancer, arteriosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.

Nano-particles have made their entry into a wide range of everyday articles – from clothes to facial creams and car waxes.

New Danish research on mice and rats at Copenhagen University, however, indicates that two of the most-used varieties of Nano-particles may also increase the risk of diseases such as cancer, arteriosclerosis and cardiovascular ailments.

“What we can say is that Nano-particles have inherent qualities that mean that we should see them as dangerous. We are particularly concerned about cancer and cardiovascular disease, but I cannot say how big the risk is. In order to do that, one needs to know the level of exposure – and we really don’t know how much people are exposed to Nano-particles,” says Associate Professor in Environmental Medicine Peter Møller.

Møller and his colleagues have researched the affects of C60 fullerenes, which are shaped like footballs, and Single-walled Carbon Nanotubes, which are shaped like tubes, on mice and rats.

Lungs and liver
Their research has shown damage to lung and liver DNA brought about by destructive free radical molecules that were produced by nano-particles.

A comparison between nano-particles and diesel exhaust shows that nano-particles are generally less dna-destructive than diesel exhaust particles, but that the two particles affect DNA in the same way.

[olas]

http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article739720.ece

Danish research suggests that some nano-particles may cause cancer, arteriosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.

Nano-particles have made their entry into a wide range of everyday articles – from clothes to facial creams and car waxes.

New Danish research on mice and rats at Copenhagen University, however, indicates that two of the most-used varieties of Nano-particles may also increase the risk of diseases such as cancer, arteriosclerosis and cardiovascular ailments.

“What we can say is that Nano-particles have inherent qualities that mean that we should see them as dangerous. We are particularly concerned about cancer and cardiovascular disease, but I cannot say how big the risk is. In order to do that, one needs to know the level of exposure – and we really don’t know how much people are exposed to Nano-particles,” says Associate Professor in Environmental Medicine Peter Møller.

Møller and his colleagues have researched the affects of C60 fullerenes, which are shaped like footballs, and Single-walled Carbon Nanotubes, which are shaped like tubes, on mice and rats.

Lungs and liver
Their research has shown damage to lung and liver DNA brought about by destructive free radical molecules that were produced by nano-particles.

A comparison between nano-particles and diesel exhaust shows that nano-particles are generally less dna-destructive than diesel exhaust particles, but that the two particles affect DNA in the same way.


What is your point?
You are saying that the nano particles was a human invention? And it would be forbidden?

Do you had problems with DiHidrogen Monoxide , too? www.dhmo.org

[real6]

What is your point?
You are saying that the nano particles was a human invention? And it would be forbidden?

Do you had problems with DiHidrogen onoxide , too? www.dhmo.org

What is your fucking point? Go ask the people that write these articles.

[olas]

What is your fucking point? Go ask the people that write these articles.

You can´t understand what you read. But you feel confortable to spray it around.
Like an ugly parrot?

[veritasvoice]

Thanks for the post, real6. This is fairly old news, but still relevant...there haven't been a lot of safety studies into the use of nano-particles in industry, and it needs to happen if the field of nanomedicine can really take off.

Here's another link for you on the same subject:

http://biotech.about.com/od/bioethics/a/nanosafe.htm

Nanoparticle technology is applied in various industries, where they are used as fuel additives, in manufacture of stain-resistant fabrics, strengthening additions to sports equipment, as semiconductors, and in household and other chemicals. Another useful application is soil and groundwater remediation, where nanoparticles which, for example, contain zero-valent iron, can be used to deliver the catalyst into contaminated groundwater and facilitate treatment.

Personally, if they are going to start treating groundwater with these, and especially if doctors are going to inject them into human beings, I want to know if they're toxic or not.

That said, this issue could be an in for excessive government regulation of nanotechnology, which tends to retard development. And with our current NWO governments, the less they have to do with nanotechnology the better, imo.

[real6]

You can´t understand what you read. But you feel confortable to spray it around.
Like an ugly parrot?

Well maybe if you spoke proper 'Engrish', we could all understand you.

Thanks for the post, real6. This is fairly old news, but still relevant...there haven't been a lot of safety studies into the use of nano-particles in industry, and it needs to happen if the field of nanomedicine can really take off.

Here's another link for you on the same subject:

http://biotech.about.com/od/bioethics/a/nanosafe.htm



Personally, if they are going to start treating groundwater with these, and especially if doctors are going to inject them into human beings, I want to know if they're toxic or not.

That said, this issue could be an in for excessive government regulation of nanotechnology, which tends to retard development. And with our current NWO governments, the less they have to do with nanotechnology the better, imo.

Cool ;)

[olas]

Well maybe if you spoke proper 'Engrish', we could all understand you.



Cool ;)

Because you don´t know what to say, anyway.

[real6]

Because you don´t know what to say, anyway.

You mean how you do?

[olas]

You mean how you do?

Not.

I mean, look take it easy because i have a bad engrish, if you don´t know what´s the news is about, why should you post it?

[leviathanstaar]

Not.

I mean, look take it easy because i have a bad engrish, if you don´t know what´s the news is about, why should you post it?

He should post it because the curious aspect of his free will desires others to disseminate the information.

He should also do so without responding to slight of hand type ad-hominem posts by a bitter soul, causing him similar behaviour.

You could have explained what was there to see, before scoffing that he didnt see it.

[olas]

He should post it because the curious aspect of his free will desires others to disseminate the information.

He should also do so without responding to slight of hand type ad-hominem posts by a bitter soul, causing him similar behaviour.

You could have explained what was there to see, before scoffing that he didnt see it.

May be my engrish is that bad as realsex says, but tell me, please, if you don´t understand something how can you recognize it´s importance?

The animal that repeats, and don´t know what´s going on, is called Parrot? And the one that love´s rotten meat is called Black Vulture?

[decim]

May be my engrish is that bad as realsex says, but tell me, please, if you don´t understand something how can you recognize it´s importance?

The animal that repeats, and don´t know what´s going on, is called Parrot? And the one that love´s rotten meat is called Black Vulture?

Perfectly comprehensible from here.

[real6]

He should post it because the curious aspect of his free will desires others to disseminate the information.

He should also do so without responding to slight of hand type ad-hominem posts by a bitter soul, causing him similar behaviour.

You could have explained what was there to see, before scoffing that he didnt see it.

Thank you. Dont worry, Olas onlys posts right after i post something and says something uneducated. Just ignore him.

[olas]

Thank you. Dont worry, Olas onlys posts right after i post something and says something uneducated. Just ignore him.

Actualy you are being a kind of proud. Im just trying to expose your kind of work, nothing more.
I don´t have nothing against you, really. Just against your job.

[take it easy]

What is your fucking point? Go ask the people that write these articles.

you tell him - you post top articles mate. thanks!

more to the point, i'm going to have learn more about nano particles, but they sound like an ideal thing to put in chemtrails.

[real6]

Actualy you are being a kind of proud. Im just trying to expose your kind of work, nothing more.
I don´t have nothing against you, really. Just against your job.

Has nothing of me being proud, it's the fact that you post non-sense everytime i post some article. If you don't like it, then don't post. You talk in broken sentences and it's old of boring. But here you speak fine, so i know it's all an act you're putting on.

What i'm curious about is this: You say you are exposing my kind of work? Then what kind of work am i doing? My job? I'm just very curious.

[real6]

you tell him - you post top articles mate. thanks!

more to the point, i'm going to have learn more about nano particles, but they sound like an ideal thing to put in chemtrails.

Thanks, i just like to post a different array of articles from all over the world. If people don't like it, then keep the negitivity to yourself. Simple as that. People don't want to always argue. That's stupid and it drains alot out of people. :(

[olas]

Thanks, i just like to post a different array of articles from all over the world. If people don't like it, then keep the negitivity to yourself. Simple as that. People don't want to always argue. That's stupid and it drains alot out of people. :(

Talking about negativity, that´s something that we can build spreading desilusion. Isn´t it?

I know that you are doing your job, but you should read the articles before.

Pretty sensationalist!!!

[jesuitsdidit]

Talking about negativity, that´s something that we can build spreading desilusion. Isn´t it?

I know that you are doing your job, but you should read the articles before.

Pretty sensationalist!!!

so
nanoparticles r ok r they?

methinks u behave like an agent..

of course they want to derail real6
thats why realy is here..

[olas]

so
nanoparticles r ok r they?

methinks u behave like an agent..

of course they want to derail real6
thats why realy is here..

Nanoparticules just are.
It always existed, and it will ever do.
But tell me, if realsex is here for that, why should you be?
Are you afraid of DHMO, too? http://www.dhmo.org/

[always_rebel]

What is your point?
You are saying that the nano particles was a human invention?


yes, nanotechnology, and nano particles are a human invention.

http://www.uml.edu/wuml/podcast/media/nanotechnology-kd-001.jpg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3788673.stm

Nobelist Rick Smalley. Courtesy Rice University

Richard “Rick” Errett Smalley, best known for co-discovering the soccer ball-shaped “buckyball” molecule, died of leukemia on October 28, 2005, at the age of 62. He was a leading advocate of nanotechnology and its many applications, including its use in creating strong but lightweight materials as well as its potential to fight cancer. Upon his passing, the US Senate passed a resolution to honor Smalley, crediting him as the “Father of Nanotechnology.”

Nanotech guru turns back on 'goo'

By Paul Rincon
BBC News Online science staff

Nanomachine "factories" could one day sit on a desktop

The scientist many regard as the father of nanotechnology has backed away from his famous claim that nanomachines could turn the planet into "grey goo".
Eric Drexler now says nanomachines that self-replicate exponentially are unlikely ever to enter widespread use.

In the journal Nanotechnology, he stresses that tiny machines would need close control in order to be efficient.

Dr Drexler says when he made the statement in the 80s, he underestimated the impact it would have on the field.

Nanotechnology is an umbrella discipline concerned with engineering objects and working devices from individual atoms and molecules.

Bug swarms

"What I did not expect was that efforts to quiet concerns over grey goo would lead to false scientific denials of feasible technologies," Dr Drexler, chairman emeritus of the Foresight Institute in Palo Alto, US, told BBC News Online.

"I also underestimated the popularity of depictions of swarms of tiny nanobugs in science fiction and popular culture."

Dr Drexler originally floated the grey goo idea in his book Engines Of Creation, published in 1986.

He described a hypothetical scenario in which self-replicating nanomachines able to break down biological material could run amok, replicating exponentially and turning terrestrial life into mush.

Drexler explains that, at the time, he was concerned the excitement at the potential benefits of nanotechnology would overshadow the inherent risks and dangers.

"I thought it was important to outline a worst-case scenario so that those learning about nanotechnology could not consider the benefits without understanding potential risks," Dr Drexler explained.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3788673.stm

[olas]

yes, nanotechnology, and nano particles are a human invention.

http://www.uml.edu/wuml/podcast/media/nanotechnology-kd-001.jpg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3788673.stm





http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3788673.stm

That´s my point against Realsex. He does things in a way that causes alarm and fear then one USUALLY stops to think.

The biggest nanoparticules generator is called SUN.

Tell me that you´re not afraid of dhmo, too. Please. www.dhmo.org