User:NanoIQP
Nanotechnology is one of the most promising fields of research in the world today. One factor that prevents wide growth in the practical application of nanotechnology is social acceptance. There are currently theoretical and practical ways to implement fail-safe designs in nanotechnology. Development of these designs will reduce risks to users, and as a result, should increase the social acceptance of nanotechnology.
Wikipedia defines a fail-safe as: a device or feature which, in the event of failure, responds in a way that will cause no harm, or at least a minimum of harm, to other devices or personnel. Fail-safe principles are governed by national standards and engineering practices, and are widely used in conventional engineering design (see examples). It is possible to scale down current macro-scale fail-safe principles and devices for similar applications at the nano-scale.[1]
Perhaps the greatest challenge for the social acceptance of nanotechnology will arise when nanostructures start being injected into the human body, for the purpose of increasing health. While any structure would be developed to be bio-compatible and harmless, sound engineering design must take into account all possibilities of failure. Thus the design would include ways to manipulate them in the body in case failure occurs. Five health related research areas in which fail-safes or other preventative measures could be incorporated are discussed below.
Ferrous Nanoparticles
[edit]Many researchers are looking into creating nano-scale robots (“nanobots”), for the purpose of undertaking tasks where only robots on the nano scale can be used, such as inside the human body. These robots would have the ability to construct other nanostructures or perform medical procedures, and will be introduced into the body via an injection.[2] The robots’ shells and circuits would be made of ferrous nanoparticles so that a magnetic field could be used to render them inactive, by preventing or manipulating their movement. In case of failure or malfunction, a small EMP or an MRI could be used to deactivate the nanobots, should they malfunction. Either technique induces a large electromagnetic field, corrupting the memory and shorting out the circuitry of any electronic device within range.
Amino Acids
[edit]Researchers are pursuing the building of nanostructures using amino acids. Nanostructures that are created using amino acids are constructed using only synthetic types of amino acids, which tags these structures with unique molecules. These engineered amino acids essentially form synthetic proteins that differ from the naturally occurring proteins in the human body. This difference in the engineered amino acids makes these proteins easy to isolate and target.[3] In case of failure or malfunction, it is possible to identify these proteins using the specifically targeted molecules, which act as a flag to indicate the location of the target. Then, another mechanism would be used to isolate them and deactivate their unwanted action. In essence, these engineered amino acids create a fail-safe mechanism that acts as an ON/OFF switch to protect the patient when a malfunction occurs.
DNA
[edit]
DNA within our bodies naturally breaks down, replicates itself, and rebuilds itself every time a cell divides. These processes are all controlled and completed by various enzymes. DNA molecules are composed of corresponding base pair nucleotides in a double helix formation which makes these processes very efficient, accurate, and predictable. Due to the ease in which DNA molecules can be fashioned, many publications in the academic society are geared towards creating nanostructures using DNA.[4] With a DNA-based nano-device, synthetic proteins could be created; designed for a specific purpose such as the extermination of the device. These synthetic proteins would be injected into the body to break down the DNA and render a nano-device harmless in the event of a malfunction.
Biological proteins within the human body perform three main functions: as structural building blocks, enzymes, and in cellular signaling. Synthetic proteins could be developed as a form of indicator and attached to a DNA-based nano-device.[5] This indicator would then be used for the purpose of monitoring nano-devices in the human body. If all DNA-based nano-devices were closely monitored in the human body, then those devices could be carefully watched, and eliminated or removed quickly in the event of a malfunction.
Programming
[edit]In today’s world there are many instances in which fail-safes are applied in a programming sense. For example, street lights are programmed to set all lights to red when conflicting green lights are sensed. In nanotechnology, and more specifically nanobots, the need for a sound programming architecture becomes much more important due to potentially higher risks. A two-layer approach can be used to control nano-devices, first by providing a preprogrammed fail-safe functionality in case of anticipated failures, and secondly a remote controlled ability to override the programming in more complex situations.[6] The “remote” controlled nano-device would require a specialist in the room, to guide the nanobot throughout the procedure.
Cellular Engineering
[edit]Many researchers are developing methods that use bacteria to deliver drugs.[7] These bacteria can be “programmed” to perform a specific task, and can be directed to go to targeted locations in the body.[8] However, the bacteria may damage healthy organs or fail to deliver the medicine to the sick organ in the case of a malfunction. In such cases a fail-safe mechanism is required to neutralize the bacteria and prevent damage. In these cases an antibiotic is suitable as the fail-safe agent.
Interactive Qualifying Project
[edit]This article is part of an Interactive Qualifying Project (IQP) completed by a group of students from Worcester Polytechnic Institute. This project looks into possible fail-safes to be used in order to gain social acceptance of nanotechnology. Included is a survey that will examine how individuals from different backgrounds feel about the development of nanotechnology, and how implementing fail-safes may affect their opinions. It would improve the quality of our results if a few minutes were spent completing this survey. This survey is anonymous, and if completed the user may choose to be entered into a drawing for a free t-shirt from the WPI on-campus store.
Additional Images
[edit]-
Nanoelectromechanical Resonator
References
[edit]- ^ Whitesides, George M. and J Christopher Love. “The Art of Building Small.” Scientific American Reports Sep. 2007: 13-21.
- ^ Šafařík, Ivo, and Mirka Šafaříková. “Magnetic Nanoparticles and Biosciences.” Chemical Monthly 133.6 (2002): 737-759.
- ^ Schafmeister, Christian E. “Molecular Lego.” Scientific American Reports Sep 2007: 22-29.
- ^ Seeman, Nadrian C. “Nanotechnology and the Double Helix.” Scientific American Reports. Sep. 2007: 30-39.
- ^ May, Mike. “Nanotechnology: Thinking Small.” Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 107, No. 9 (Sep., 1999), pp. A450-A451 Published by: The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Stable URL: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3434647>.
- ^ Shapiro, Ehud, and Beneson, Yaakov. “Bringing DNA Computers to Life.” Scientific American Reports Sep 2007: 41-47.
- ^ Knapp, Louise. “Bad Bacteria Key to Drug Delivery.” Wired. 28 Feb. 2003. CondéNet, Inc. 10 Oct. 2008. <http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2003/02/57547>.
- ^ Cao, Guozhong. Nanostructures & Nanomaterials: Synthesis, Properties & Applications. London, UK: Imperial College Press, 2004.
External Links
[edit]Worcester Polytechnic Institute Nanotechnology Fail-Safes Survey