Nanotechnology and the human future: Policy, ethics, and risk

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Volumn 1093, Issue , 2006, Pages 280-300

  Cameron, Nigel M De S ^a  

^a ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

ELSI; Ethics; Genetically modified organisms (GMOs); Nanotechnology

Indexed keywords

AWARENESS; CONFERENCE PAPER; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ETHICS; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; LEGAL ASPECT; NANOANALYSIS; NANOTECHNOLOGY; POLICY; POLITICAL SYSTEM; RISK MANAGEMENT; FORECASTING; HUMAN; REVIEW; RISK; UNITED STATES;

FORECASTING; HUMANS; NANOTECHNOLOGY; RISK; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33947604609     PISSN: 00778923     EISSN: 17496632     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1196/annals.1382.019     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. ANDREWS, L.B., and N.M. de S. CAMERON. 2001. Cloning and the debate about abortion. Chicago Tribune, August 8, online at http://www.genetics-and-society.org/resources/items/20010808 chicagotribune cameron.html
2. ANONYMOUS. 2001. North Dakota effort to ban altered wheat is set back. New York Times, March 31, online at http://query.nytimes.com/gst/ fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C07E7DC133FF932A05750C0A9679C8B63
3. BAKER, S., and A. ASTON. 2005. The business of nanotech. Business Week, February 14, online at http://www.businessweek. com/magazine/content/05 07/b3920001mz001.htm
4. BOND, P.J. 2003. Converging technologies and competitiveness. Pp. 33-35 in M.C. Roco and W.S. Bainbridge (eds.). Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
5. BROWN, P., and J. VIDAL. 1999. GM investors told to sell their shares. The Guardian, August 25, online at http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmdebate/Story/0,,201282,00.html
6. COGHLAN, A. 2003. UK public strongly rejects GM foods. NewScientist.com, September 24, online at http://www.newscientist.com/ channel/life/gm-food/dn4191
7. COLVIN, V.L. 2003. Testimony of Dr. Vicki L. Colvin in regard to Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, online at http://www.house.gov/science/ hearings/full03/apr09/colvin.htm
8. HETT, A. 2004. Nanotechnology: Small Matter, Many Unknowns. Zurich, Switzerland: Swiss Reinsurance Company (Swiss Re).
9. KASS, L. 1999. The moral meaning of genetic technology. Commentary Magazine 108(5), 32-38.
10. KASS, L.R., ed. 2003. Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness. Washington, DC: President's Council on Bioethics, online at http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/beyondtherapy/beyond therapy final webcorrected.pdf
11. KEIPER, A. 2003. The nanotechnology revolution. The New Atlantis, August, online at http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/2/keiper. htm
12. LEWIS, C.S. 1943. The Abolition of Man. London: Oxford University Press. Also online at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/ lewis/abolition1.htm
13. MCCARTHY, M. 2003. GM crops? No thanks. Independent, September 25, online at http://news.independent.co.uk/ environment/article88426.ece
14. NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH. 1997. Recombinant DNA research: actions under the guidelines. Pp. 171-185 in L. Walters, and J.G. Palmer (eds.), The Ethics of Human Gene Therapy. New York: Oxford University Press.
15. POLLACK, A. 2000. Aventis gives up license to sell bioengineered corn. New York Times, October 13, online at http://query.nytimes.com/ gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9F04EFDD153FF930A25753C1A9669C8B63
16. SNOW, C.P. 1959. The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution.NewYork: Cambridge University Press.
17. STIPP, D. 2001. Is Monsanto's biotech worth less than a hill of beans? Fortune, February 19, online at http://money.cnn.com/magazines/ fortune/fortune_archive/2000/02/21/273844/index.htm
18. VIDAL, J. 1999. How Monsanto's mind was changed. The Guardian, Oct. 9, online at http://www.biotech-info.net/mind_change.html
19. WEIL, V. 2001. Ethical issues in nanotechnology. Pp. 244-251 in M.C. Roco, and W.S. Bainbridge (eds.), Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.