Introducing Emerging Technologies – Nanotechnology Within the context of the history of technology, ‘emerging technologies’ is a broad term which helps to encompass some of the most significant and cutting edge technological advances taking place during the twenty-first century. Examples of such technologies currently include nanotechnology, biotechnology, cognitive science, robotics and artificial intelligence 1 . Are there any problems with this? Should Christians be concerned? It is a commonly accepted fact that the very essence of technology is to make things that allow us to do more than we could without them. In many respects Christians should not fear technological progress as technology is not inherently wrong. Under the covenantal obligations we are still to adhere to today, stewardship of our created world requires some form of technology if we are to exercise dominion and ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it’ 2 . Christians believe that every human being is made in the image of God. We reflect God’s image in what we do (capabilities and attributes) and what we are (our humanity). Therefore each human life has a unique dignity and unique value because of the divine image. In the light of this we cannot ‘improve’ upon human nature, as this would involve altering the image which we bear. Technology is generally helpful to the degree that it enables us to have dominion in the world and addresses human problems like sickness. As such, emerging technologies offer the prospect of being able to enjoy a fuller and richer human experience than would otherwise be the case. In the words of Professor John Wyatt, we are ‘flawed masterpieces’ upon which we can carry out ethical art restoration, preserving and restoring the masterpiece whilst keeping to the original artist’s (God) intentions. Technology can become a problem, however, when the boundaries of ‘being human’ are exceeded and we enter into new ‘post-human’ territory. As Christians we must be informed and engage with the issues presented by new technologies in order to help influence the decisions surrounding their development and application, thereby continuing to uphold and celebrate what it is to bear God’s image and be human. It’s all science to me. What can I do? One of the advantages of living in a democratic society is that we have the opportunity to exercise our right to express our thoughts and opinions to politicians and regulators on a whole variety of issues, including those relating to science and technology.
1
In brief, nanotechnology is the science of the very small; tiny matter. Biotechnology refers to a field of biology involving the use of living things in engineering, technology and medicine, for example genetic engineering. Information technology covers developments in computing and advances in capturing or simulating human abilities using computers (artificial intelligence). Cognitive science or cognitive neuroscience involves the understanding of mental processes and behaviour. 2 Genesis 1:28 (New International Version)
Increasingly there are calls for public engagement strategies to be implemented which allow members of the public to feed into discussions concerning how new advances in science and technology are to be regulated. The CARE election briefing papers are going to address a number of concerns regarding the emerging technologies. This paper will look at nanotechnology.
Nanotechnology Often termed the science of the very, very small, nanotechnology is the manipulation of matter’s most basic building blocks: atoms and molecules. Strictly speaking, nanotechnology is not a technology but rather a size - the nano-scale which atoms and molecules operate at, hence why the term ‘nanoscience’. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter; a human hair is roughly 100,000 nanometers wide. Nanomedicine refers to the direct application of nanotechnology in medicine. The advent of nanotechnology represents what could be termed as a leap from the realm of science fiction to science reality. Technology forecasters point to nanotechnology as the key driver behind the ‘convergence’ of emerging technologies. Consequently, nano represents a ‘rebound revolution’ - reframing our understanding and engagement with science and technology as well as recasting the socio-economic relations of our day. This revolution does not occur in a vacuum but emerges in the context of profound legal, ethical, economic, social, medical and political questions. These will help shape and determine whether the future is one of sustainability or something far more sinister. On the one hand it is hoped that nanotechnology could result in self assembling, self replicating nano devices 3 which would be implantable into the human body. These could help detect and destroy cancerous cells and infections, as well as repair genetic mutation, and deliver precisely targeted drug therapy. Current research already points to the very real possibility of this being achieved 4 . On the other hand there are some very real concerns:
Safety Some nanoparticles have been found to pass through the skin, offering exciting possibilities of targeted drug delivery. Conversely, given the size, nanoparticles could also interfere with the functioning of proteins on the surface of cells, or be taken up into cells and bind to intercellular proteins.
Civil liberties A further application of nanotechnology will present new possibilities for collecting new data. There is the potential for tiny senses to be embedded in clothes, products or even bodies which could record and collect a multitude of data, including the movement of people, products, health and financial details.
Nano-divide To date, the advances and development of nanotechnology have been fuelled by a richworld agenda, namely the manufacturing of, for example, tennis balls, tennis racquets and 3
This idea was popularised by Eric Drexler’s in his ‘grey goo’ scenario: nanomachines running out of control, destroying humankind and the planet with the result that everything turns into ‘grey goo’. 4 McGill University, ‘DNA nanotechnology breakthrough offers promising applications in medicine’ 17 March 2010, http://www.mcgill.ca/newsroom/news/item/?item_id=115523 [accessed 17th March 2010] 2
laptop computers. Such developments indicate that nanotechnology could well help to widen the gap between rich and poor, and create what some have referred to as a ‘nano divide’.
A post-human future Furthermore, with the Transhumanist movement 5 hijacking nanotechnology as their technology, in order to reach a post-human existence, could nanotechnology serve as the key driver towards the end of the human project as we know it? There is the very real possibility, given the rate of progress, that through the advances both in nanotechnology and artificial intelligence, we could: a) see the creation of superior beings who become our masters or b) ‘enhance’ our intelligence using a machine model and, in doing so, loose our essential humanity 6 .
Nanotechnology in the 2005-2010 Parliament According to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills website, the British Government’s vision for nanotechnologies is ‘...for the UK to derive maximum economic, environmental and societal benefit from the development and commercialisation of nanotechnologies, and to be in the forefront of international activity to ensure there is appropriate control of potential risks to health, safety and the environment’ 7 . Prior to the period in question, in June 2003 the British Government commissioned the Royal Society (RS) and the Royal Academy of Engineering (RAEng) to carry out an independent study of likely developments and whether nanotechnology raises, or is likely to raise, new ethical, health and safety or social issues which are not covered by current regulation. The RS/RAEng report, Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties, was published on 29 July 2004. The report quickly earned widespread respect and ‘gold standard’ status for its detail and perspectives on the advances surrounding nanotechnology, as well as helping to correct the Government's past failure to lead on the nanotech issue. The Government responded favourably to the report but did not commit any new money for the research, in order to support the development of robust regulations. Since 2004, further reports have been published and numerous public engagement strategies implemented, in order to respond to the points raised by the RS/RAEng report. It has been suggested that 50 national and international reviews have been carried out by various government departments, industry associations and insurance organisations 8 . All of these projects have sought to research, clarify and chart a way forward on matters concerning nanoparticles and associated risks. The common findings of all of these reports can be summarised quite succinctly. First, it is agreed that there are potential risks to health and the environment from the manufacture and use of nanoparticles. Second, there is a lack of knowledge about what these risks are and how they should be dealt with. Third, as a result of the previous point, research is needed to fill this knowledge deficit, which involves the participation of all stakeholders. 5
As the term suggests, the Transhumanist movement advocates crossing over from where we are currently as humans to a post-human future. Any form of technology which allows us to live longer and be stronger and smarter is embraced by transhumanism in order to get us out of our human skin and arrive at something better and superior - the 'post-human future'. 6 Such an idea was popularized by Sun Microsystems co-Founder Bill Joy in his now infamous essay ‘Why the Future doesn’t need us’ in Wired magazine, 8.04. April 2000, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html 7 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills ‘Nanotechnologies’, http://www.bis.gov.uk/policies/go-science/science-ingovernment/key-issues/nanotechnologies [accessed 17th March 2010] 8 Aitken, R.J, Hankin, S.M, Ross, B. et al, EMERGNANO A review of completed and near completed environment, health and safety research on nanomaterials and nanotechnology: Executive Summary, (Defra, 2009), http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=CB0409_7908_EXE.doc [accessed 25 June 2009] , p.2. 3
However, even whilst nanotechnology is developing by leaps and bounds and is impacting the products that we use, there has been no progress in translating the recognised concerns into more research or an appropriate legislative framework. Several reports from well respected bodies criticise the distinct lack of targeted research into areas of uncertainty and research that would fill ‘knowledge gaps’ regarding the toxicology, health and environmental effects of nanomaterials 9 .
Nanotechnology in the Next Parliament: Pressures for Change Given that whilst nanotechnology continues to develop, impacting household products and the human body, there still remains a large gap in our knowledge base and regulation of nanotechnology, there is the real need to press for: a) research on the impact of nanotechnology and b) the introduction of rigorous regulation to protect our humanity. Due to the revolutionary nature of nanotechnology, there is the need to ensure the continued engagement of the public regarding advances in this area. A survey of public attitudes towards the use of nanotechnologies with the aim of informing debate on the subject is necessary. CARE supports recommendations 19 and 28 of the House of Lords report. These call for a) a website to be commissioned and designed to give the public a balanced source of information on nanotechnologies, and b) in collaboration with relevant stakeholders, support for the development of voluntary codes of conduct for nanotechnologies, in order to assist the continuing development of effective legislation for this rapidly emerging technology. Such codes should be of a high standard and subject to effective and transparent forms of monitoring.
Nanotechnology and Party Lines Currently none of the three major political parties have published any specific direction on the use and application of nanotechnology.
Nanotechnology and Devolution The impact of emerging technologies presents implications which affect and have a general applicability across the UK. Consequently matters pertaining to nanotechnology would more than likely be discussed in relation to the Westminster Parliament and not in isolation, drawing upon the input and advice of the Council for Science and Technology 10 .
9
Such reports include the Council for Science and Technology "Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: A Review of Government's Progress on its Policy Commitments" March 2007, http://www.cst.gov.uk/news/Files/nano_review.pdf [accessed 17th March 2010] and House of Lords Committee on Science and Technoloyy, ‘Nanotechnologies and Food’ report 10 The Council for Science and Technology (CST) is the UK Prime Minister's top-level independent advisory body on science and technology policy issues. See CST’s “Ways of Working – Working with Government” (para. 24), http://www.cst.gov.uk/about/index.shtml [accessed 17th March 2010] 4
Nanotechnology: Key Questions for Candidates
If elected, would you commit to raising the profile of, and helping to initiate discussion of, the ethical, social and legal implications of developments, where nanotechnology intersects with issues of human nature and dignity?
If elected, would you commit to pressing for further research in this area and for the creation of a robust legal framework to protect civil liberties and health?
If elected, would you commit to pressing for restrictions on the application of nanotechnologies until more research has been carried out in terms of its impact on the human body and our humanity?
Policy Document for Make the Cross Count 2010
CARE 53 Romney Street London SW1P 3RF
T: 020 7233 0455 mail@care.org.uk www.care.org.uk
www.makethecrosscount2010.net
Charity number 1066963 Scottish Charity SC093811
5