The Neighborhood Toxicologist: New Journal, Nanotoxicology

Thursday, April 12, 2007

New Journal, Nanotoxicology

For those interested in nanotoxicology, there is a new journal called Nanotoxicology, published by Informa Healthcare. It’s a quarterly and you can review the first issue (just published March 2007) for free, which allows you to access to the first issue. The first article, Toxicology of nanoparticles: A Historical Perspective, by Gunter Oberdorster, Vicki Stone and Ken Donaldson, provides an excellent review. They include some early studies of particles such as viruses and combustion particles that were around well before the age of intentionally manufactured nanomaterials but which fit the nano description, and provided scientists with insights into the movement and fate of very small particles in living systems.

I’d expect an explosive growth in our understanding of how nanoparticles interact with the environment and with living bodies, but it seems there is a long ways to got and an urgency to get there quickly. Notes Oberdorster and others, “There have been many conferences, meetings, and workshops….with as many calls for developing testing strategies, with only few proposals, followed through by far less action.”

This first sample issue is worth a read and the few moments it takes to register for your month-long free access. Other articles include: “Assessing exposure to airborne nanomaterials: Current abilities and future requirements” by Andrew D. Maynard; Robert J. Aitken; Characterization of the size, shape, and state of dispersion of nanoparticles for toxicological studies by Kevin W. Powers; Maria Palazuelos; Brij M. Moudgil; Stephen M. Roberts; and Cellular responses to nanoparticles: Target structures and mechanisms by Klaus Unfried; Catrin Albrecht; Lars-Oliver Klotz; Anna Von Mikecz; Susanne Grether-Beck; Roel P. F. Schins.

No comments:

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Some history: Toxicology as a formally recognized scientific discipline is relatively new (mid 1900’s) although the science itself is thousands of years old. Consider the potential results of early trial and error experiences of hunter-gatherers for whom identifying a toxic plant or animal was a life or death situation. Some of the most poisonous substances known today are naturally produced chemicals including Ricin from castor beans or tetrodotoxin from the puffer fish. Early humans’ careful observation of plants or animals with toxic characteristics such as frogs containing curare, were put to use not only for avoidance of toxic substances but for weapons as well. Additionally, many naturally derived poisons were likely used for hunting, medicinals (the Egyptians were aware of many toxic substances such as lead, opium and hemlock as early as 1500 BCE), and eventually for the political poisonings practiced, for example, by the early Greeks and Romans.

As humans sought to better understand natural compounds that were both beneficial and harmful, there was very little if any clear understanding of the fundamental chemical nature of substances. That is, there was no connection between the ‘extract’ or ‘essence’ of a poisonous plant or animal and any one particular chemical that might cause toxicity. In fact, an awareness of chemistry in its modern form did not occur until the mid to late 1600’s[i]. So it is ironic that Paracelsus, a physician from the sixteenth century and one of the early “Fathers of Toxicology” had no clear understanding of chemistry as we know it today. He along with many others at that time apparently believed that all matter was composed of three “primary bodies” (sulfur, salt, and mercury)[ii]. Yet Paracelsus also coined the now famous (or infamous) maxim of the newly emerging discipline of toxicology:

“All substances are poisons, there is none which is not a poison. The right dose differentiates a poison from a remedy.” (Paracelsus,1493-1541)

This phrase and Paracelsus’ name are committed to memory by hundreds of new toxicology students each year and has become the ‘motto’ of toxicology. Interestingly, if one takes Paracelsus at face value, it appears he was referring to potential remedies. This is an important point, since in recent years some have turned this around to suggest that exposure to very small doses of highly toxic chemicals (such as dioxins) might not be an problem! These days most of us are well aware of the fact that overdosing can turn remedies to poisons, even with apparently innocuous drugs such as aspirin and Tylenol.

[i] Ball, P. 1999. Life’s Matrix: A Biography of Water. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, NY, NY.

[ii] Ball, 2001.