Category Archives: Nano medicine

Professor Alexander Seifalian

There aren't many scientists who have grown human cells on the back of a butterfly wing, but Alexander is one of them!

Professor Alexander Seifalian (UCL Centre for Nanotechnology & Regenerative Medicine) and his team are aiming to make organ donation a thing of the past, combining nano-composite materials with stem cell technologies for the growth of replacement organs.

He used his discoveries to fight for the life of a young Icelandic man whose throat was destroyed by cancer. Given two weeks to live, Alexander set out to build for the man the world's first artificial windpipe, made from nanomaterials and stem cells - and succeeded.

"Welcome to the body parts shop... would you like to place an order?"

Original post:
Welcome to the body parts shop... would you like to place an order?

Eqalix Inc., an emerging regenerative medicine company, announces its Scientific Advisory Board (SAB). This SAB gives Eqalix a depth and breadth of experience necessary to take it to the next level.

Reston, VA (PRWEB) October 09, 2012

"We are very pleased to bring together these key thought leaders to establish the Eqalix Scientific Advisory Board," stated Joseph P. Connell, Eqalix CEO and Chairman of the Board. "I have worked with Drs. Gold and Goldman for years and have always admired their abilities. Dr Lelkes technologies will make a profound impact upon aesthetic dermatology, wound healing and regenerating blood vessels, nerve endings and damaged organs with the guidance of this distinguished panel. It is not clich in any manner when I say that we are thrilled to work with this team. We look to their guidance, industry knowledge and network to help deliver these therapies into clinic and prospective patients as soon as possible, as I am confident our technologies will make a difference, said Connell.

The members of the Eqalix Scientific Advisory Board are:

Peter I. Lelkes, PhD: Chief Scientific Advisor; Dr. Lelkes is the Laura H. Carnell Professor and Founding Chair of the Department of Bioengineering in the College of Engineering at Temple University and the Inaugural Director of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine and Engineering (TIME) at Temple Universitys School of Medicine. While at Drexel, Prof. Lelkes directed an interdisciplinary program in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, focusing on nanotechnology-based biomaterials and soft tissue engineering, employing developmental biological principles to enhance the tissue-specific differentiation of embryonic and adult stem cells. Dr. Lelkes has organized several Keystone conferences and published more than 160 peer-reviewed papers and 45 book chapters and made more than 400 presentations nationally and internationally.

Dr. Lelkes basic and translational research has been support by federal (NIH, NSF, NASA, DOE) and state funding agencies, (NTI and Dept. of Commerce, Tobacco Settlement Funds) and private Foundations, including the Coulter Foundation. Most recently, Dr. Lelkes has been named Director of the Surgical Engineering Enterprise, one of the major initiatives of the strategic plan of Drexel Universitys College of Medicine. In addition, Dr. Lelkes has been the team leader for tissue engineering at the Nanotechnology Institute of Southeastern Pennsylvania (NTI) and is the Co-Director of PATRIC, the Pennsylvania Advanced Textile Research and Innovation Center, focusing on BioNanoTextiles and Stem Cell Biology.

Dr Lelkes stated, "I am delighted and excited to partner with Eqalix to translate our inventions from the bench to the bedside in a timely fashion.

Mitchel P. Goldman, MD, Scientific Advisor, Founder and Medical Director of Goldman Butterwick Fitzpatrick, Groff & Fabi, Cosmetic Laser Dermatology. A graduate of Boston University, Summa Cum Laude, and the Stanford University Medical School, Dr. Goldman is a Volunteer Clinical Professor in Medicine/Dermatology at the University of California, San Diego. Dr Goldman is Board Certified by both the American Board of Dermatology and the American Board of Cosmetic Surgery.

He is a fellow of the American Academy of Dermatology, American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery, American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery and the American Society of Liposuction Surgery. He is former President of the American College of Phlebology and President-Elect of the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery. He presently serves on the Board of Trustees for the American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery. He also has authored and/or co-authored 21 Textbooks on Dermatology, Sclerotherapy, Ambulatory Phlebectomy, Cutaneous Laser Surgery, Cellulite and Dermatologic Surgery as well as over 300 peer-reviewed publications and textbook chapters.

Dr Goldman added: I am very interested and excited to work with the Eqalix team to make these technologies a success. I believe that my background lends well to truly shaping the successful commercialization of these products for my patients to improve outcomes.

Read the rest here:
Regenerative Medicine Biotech Company, Eqalix, Names Scientific Advisory Board

LOS ANGELES, Feb. 13, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- The Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics (SBMT) announced today that the organization will hold its 9th Annual World Congress on Brain, Spinal Cord Mapping, and Image Guided Therapy from June 2-4, 2012 in Toronto, Canada.  The world's top brain and spinal cord scientists and surgeons will converge on the Toronto Metro Convention Center to find solutions to some of the most difficult to treat neurological disorders, including traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries, Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and neurological cancers. 

The 2012 World Congress of SBMT is jointly supported by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the Government of Canada, the University of Toronto, and MaRS innovation; it is endorsed by the International Society for Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Medicine.

The theme of this year's World Congress is "Nano-Bio-Electronics," which focuses on the integration of nanotechnology, stem cell research, and biomedical engineering, and imaging of the brain and spinal cord to make progress in the fight against neurological diseases. The aim of the Congress is to provide a multidisciplinary forum for health professionals in the fields of neurosurgery, neurology, psychiatry, radiology, neuroscience, engineering, as well as policymakers, to collaborate as a global alliance to rapidly advance treatment of neurological disorders.

"The meeting will help us kick start a unique and efficient consortium, which will unite scientists and consolidate resources in order to help us quickly come up with solutions for the devastating neurological diseases affecting millions and costing billions in the US alone," said Babak Kateb, Chairman of the Board of SBMT, President of the Brain Mapping Foundation, and Director of the National Center for Nano-Bio-Electronics (NCNBE). Dr. Kateb states, "The purpose of the Nano-Bio-Electronic alliance is to facilitate integration of nanotechnology, Stem cell and cellular therapy with medical devices and imaging. This consortium will impact global biomedical science and healthcare delivery through national and international partnerships with governments, universities, leading organizations and industries."

Among the notable participants of the 2012 World Congress includes Canadian Surgeon General Hans W. Jung, U.S. Navy Surgeon General Matthew Nathan, and Canadian Parliament Member Kirsty Duncan.  Dr. Duncan, an advocate for brain research in Canada and a global voice for neuroscience initiatives, stated "I am honored to participate in this important conference.  It is vital that we work to enhance our understanding of brain health through research and collaboration."  She added, "We must also affirm our commitment to improving the quality of life of those who live with a brain condition and of their families and informal caregivers."

Toronto was chosen for this year's meeting because of the city's strong and globally-connected network of neuroscientists, biomedical engineers, and investors in the biomedical and nanotechnology fields.   Michael Fehlings, chairman of the local organizing committee, Professor of Neurosurgery, and Director of the Neuroscience Program at the University of Toronto, said "The meeting will showcase Canadian and international neuroscience talent in a broad range of disciplines and will highlight the latest advances in imaging, molecular and cellular mechanisms, bioengineering and surgical intervention."

Parimal Nathwani, Vice President of MaRS Innovation, added, "Forums like this represent an excellent opportunity for reviewing technologies and supporting collaboration across different institutions for more effective translation and commercialization opportunity."

The 9th Annual World Congress is still accepting abstract proposals for the meeting's workshops, lectures, and presentation sessions. Abstract submission  is open now until March 15th 2012.

For the full list of 2012 speakers to register, or support of the 9th Annual World Congress of SBMT on Brain, Spinal Cord Mapping, and Image-Guided Therapy, please visit http://www.worldbrainmapping.org  or call (310) 500-6196.

Society of Brain Mapping and Therapeutics
SBMT is a non-profit society organized for the purpose of encouraging basic and clinical scientists who are interested in areas of Brain Mapping and Intra-operative Surgical planning to improve the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of patients afflicted with neurological disorders.

This society promotes the public welfare and improves patient care through the translation of new technologies into life saving diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The society is committed to excellence in education, and scientific discovery. The society achieves its mission through multi-disciplinary collaborations with government agencies, patient advocacy groups, educational institutes and private sector (industry) as well as philanthropic organization. http://www.IBMISPS.org

University of Toronto Neuroscience Program
The University Of Toronto Faculty Of Medicine established the U of T Neuroscience Program (UTNP) as a new academic program and appointed Professor Michael G. Fehlings as its first Director on September 1, 2008. The UTNP is a robust, integrated and collaborative academic program in neurosciences that leverages the unparalleled health science network at the University of Toronto, which includes U of T's many departments and institutes, health science faculties, 9 fully-affiliated research hospitals and 20 community-affiliated hospitals and clinical care sites.

MaRS Innovation
MaRS Innovation provides an integrated commercialization platform that harnesses the economic potential of the exception discovery pipeline of 16 leading academic institutions in Ontario. MaRS Innovation is a not-for-profit organization with an independent industry- led board of directors, funded through the Government of Canada's Networks of Centres of Excellence, the Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Research and Innovation, and contributions of its member institutions. Designed to enhance the commercial output of Toronto's outstanding scientific research cluster, MaRS Innovation will make a significant contribution to Canada's economic outlook and the quality of life for Canadians and others around the world. MaRS Innovation will advance commercialization through industry partnerships, licensing and company creation. The MaRS Innovation mission is to put Canada on the global innovation stage, by better connection of research with industry and strengthening Canada's competitive capacity in the knowledge based business – in short, to launch a new generation of robust high growth Canadian companies.  www.marsinnovation.com

American Association of Neurological Surgeons
The American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) is the organization that speaks for all of neurosurgery. The AANS is dedicated to advancing the specialty of neurological surgery in order to promote the highest quality of patient care.  http://aans.org

Here is the original post:
U.S. and Canadian Scientists Form a Global Alliance for Nano-Bio-Electronics in Order to Rapidly Find Solutions for ...

Renewable energy (RE) is a subjective and divisive topic, one that is influenced by many factors, including corruption, greed and purposeful ignorance, scientific and technological advances, and simple entrepreneurial spirit vs. entrenched interests.

Here are some of the reasons that I believe that we will see RE replace old energy by the midpoint of this century:

* It has been estimated that an area 55 miles by 55 miles dedicated to current solar technologies could replace all the electrical generating power of coal and oil (in the US). Or an area 80x80 miles to replace oil, coal and natural gas. (Here in the US we have over 100,000 square miles of desert, so space isn’t a problem)

* Regarding storage technologies (1) for when the sun is down: consider the advances taking place in fuel cells, batteries (LI, redox flow batteries, and 1300-ton battery modules used for grid stabilization), flywheels, compressed air, ultracapacitors and the likelihood that we will also use battery powered vehicles as storage.

* Regarding “getting the power from the solar installation to the people” – consider advances in superconducting wire and other advanced materials which are very likely to enable cheap and efficient transmission of power from where ever it is generated to where ever it is needed.

* Rooftop and local solar: My solar powered home won’t have to worry about darkness; we’ll tap into the battery reserve, as will all rooftop solar installations. A small percentage of our overall use to be sure, but significant none the less.

And as for explicit subsidies: on a per-energy-unit basis, then yes, solar has received more subsidies than fossil fuels in the very recent past. However, on the amount that each of us taxpayers has spent in a recent five-year period, fossil fuels subsidies far exceed solar.

Estimates range: (2)

Coal subsidies = somewhere between $17B and $72B
Solar subsidies = somewhere between $500M and $5B

And let us not forget that coal subsidizes also include intangible (and often purposefully left out) costs for cleaning up the ecosystem, and the public health expenses associated with all of the damage that the mining and use of coal causes. (3)

In my opinion, at the end of the day it all boils down to two simple facts: 1) technological change is on a double exponential growth curve (4) and 2) simple entrepreneurial spirit.

While we certainly need to wean society off finite, dangerous, polluting resources like coal and oil, the earth can and may go to hell in a handbasket. However, I think that entrepreneurial spirit and the certain fact that there is a barrel of money to be made in renewable energy solutions suggests that we will see RE replace old energy by the midpoint of this century. (5)

(1) "Of the ten advanced energy storage technologies, eight have applications in storage for electric power utilities at some level of development, aiming to provide reliable, economic, and energy-efficient power back-up options." Technical Insights Analyst Miriam Nagel

A123 Systems currently sells 2MW to 200MW grid stabilization systems (battery systems). Being used for large-scale energy storage deployment to support wind and solar integration. Small in comparison to the overall needs, but just one of many rapidly improving technologies.

“If investments in the smart grid infrastructure continue, electric vehicles may become ubiquitous — both because of the economic and environmental sense they make for consumers, and because of the vast store of batteries that will be available to grid operators to balance out the intermittency of wind and solar resources.”

“There are several major studies and research showing how the United States could reach 100 percent renewable electricity by 2050. Over the next two decades, the continually rising costs of fossil fuels will make it prohibitive to continue burning them, so we’ll witness the overdue transition to a largely renewable system. Smart grid upgrades will feature two-way communication to consumer appliances, real-time pricing information, more efficient transmission infrastructure, and advanced battery and flywheel technologies to balance the inherent fluctuations of wind and solar resources.”

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/quayle-hodek-a-young-ceo-running-with-the-wind?hpt=Sbin

(2) “What if solar got the same subsidies as coal?” (Oct 21, 2010)
http://cleantechnica.com/2010/10/21/what-if-solar-got-the-same-subsidies-as-coal/

Coal subsidies: The U.S. coal industry enjoyed subsidies of around $17 billion between 2002 and 2008, including tax credits for production of "nonconventional" fuels ($14.1 billion), tax breaks on coal royalties ($986 million), exploration, and development breaks ($342 million), according to a study by the Environmental Law Institute.

http://sierraclub.typepad.com/mrgreen/2010/03/does-the-coal-industry-get-subsidies.html

Solar and wind subsidies: So far, the government has handed out about $5.4 billion, according to the Energy Department.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/18/news/economy/renewable_energy_tax_credit/index.htm

(3) Very informative investigative article http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2011/02/03/manchin-coal-subsidies/

(4) “Most long range forecasts of technical feasibility in future time periods dramatically underestimate the power of future technology because they are based on what I call the “intuitive linear” view of technological progress rather than the “historical exponential view.” To express this another way, it is not the case that we will experience a hundred years of progress in the twenty-first century; rather we will witness on the order of twenty thousand years of progress (at today’s rate of progress, that is).” Ray Kurzweil http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns

(5) During the past 11 years, as the editor of the leading nanoscale technologies web portal, I read and posted over 50,000 articles about advanced and frequently mind-blowing technologies. I have closely followed the very rapid progress in our understanding and utilization of the unique properties of the nanoscale (which greatly differ from the properties that we already understand). At the very least, we are headed for a future that not one of us can predict; what we can predict is that we will undoubtedly see old myths about technologies shattered and changes beyond our current level of comprehension.

Renewable energy (RE) is a subjective and divisive topic, one that is influenced by many factors, including corruption, greed and purposeful ignorance, scientific and technological advances, and simple entrepreneurial spirit vs. entrenched interests.

Here are some of the reasons that I believe that we will see RE replace old energy by the midpoint of this century:

* It has been estimated that an area 55 miles by 55 miles dedicated to current solar technologies could replace all the electrical generating power of coal and oil (in the US). Or an area 80x80 miles to replace oil, coal and natural gas. (Here in the US we have over 100,000 square miles of desert, so space isn’t a problem)

* Regarding storage technologies (1) for when the sun is down: consider the advances taking place in fuel cells, batteries (LI, redox flow batteries, and 1300-ton battery modules used for grid stabilization), flywheels, compressed air, ultracapacitors and the likelihood that we will also use battery powered vehicles as storage.

* Regarding “getting the power from the solar installation to the people” – consider advances in superconducting wire and other advanced materials which are very likely to enable cheap and efficient transmission of power from where ever it is generated to where ever it is needed.

* Rooftop and local solar: My solar powered home won’t have to worry about darkness; we’ll tap into the battery reserve, as will all rooftop solar installations. A small percentage of our overall use to be sure, but significant none the less.

And as for explicit subsidies: on a per-energy-unit basis, then yes, solar has received more subsidies than fossil fuels in the very recent past. However, on the amount that each of us taxpayers has spent in a recent five-year period, fossil fuels subsidies far exceed solar.

Estimates range: (2)

Coal subsidies = somewhere between $17B and $72B
Solar subsidies = somewhere between $500M and $5B

And let us not forget that coal subsidizes also include intangible (and often purposefully left out) costs for cleaning up the ecosystem, and the public health expenses associated with all of the damage that the mining and use of coal causes. (3)

In my opinion, at the end of the day it all boils down to two simple facts: 1) technological change is on a double exponential growth curve (4) and 2) simple entrepreneurial spirit.

While we certainly need to wean society off finite, dangerous, polluting resources like coal and oil, the earth can and may go to hell in a handbasket. However, I think that entrepreneurial spirit and the certain fact that there is a barrel of money to be made in renewable energy solutions suggests that we will see RE replace old energy by the midpoint of this century. (5)

(1) "Of the ten advanced energy storage technologies, eight have applications in storage for electric power utilities at some level of development, aiming to provide reliable, economic, and energy-efficient power back-up options." Technical Insights Analyst Miriam Nagel

A123 Systems currently sells 2MW to 200MW grid stabilization systems (battery systems). Being used for large-scale energy storage deployment to support wind and solar integration. Small in comparison to the overall needs, but just one of many rapidly improving technologies.

“If investments in the smart grid infrastructure continue, electric vehicles may become ubiquitous — both because of the economic and environmental sense they make for consumers, and because of the vast store of batteries that will be available to grid operators to balance out the intermittency of wind and solar resources.”

“There are several major studies and research showing how the United States could reach 100 percent renewable electricity by 2050. Over the next two decades, the continually rising costs of fossil fuels will make it prohibitive to continue burning them, so we’ll witness the overdue transition to a largely renewable system. Smart grid upgrades will feature two-way communication to consumer appliances, real-time pricing information, more efficient transmission infrastructure, and advanced battery and flywheel technologies to balance the inherent fluctuations of wind and solar resources.”

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/quayle-hodek-a-young-ceo-running-with-the-wind?hpt=Sbin

(2) “What if solar got the same subsidies as coal?” (Oct 21, 2010)
http://cleantechnica.com/2010/10/21/what-if-solar-got-the-same-subsidies-as-coal/

Coal subsidies: The U.S. coal industry enjoyed subsidies of around $17 billion between 2002 and 2008, including tax credits for production of "nonconventional" fuels ($14.1 billion), tax breaks on coal royalties ($986 million), exploration, and development breaks ($342 million), according to a study by the Environmental Law Institute.

http://sierraclub.typepad.com/mrgreen/2010/03/does-the-coal-industry-get-subsidies.html

Solar and wind subsidies: So far, the government has handed out about $5.4 billion, according to the Energy Department.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/18/news/economy/renewable_energy_tax_credit/index.htm

(3) Very informative investigative article http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2011/02/03/manchin-coal-subsidies/

(4) “Most long range forecasts of technical feasibility in future time periods dramatically underestimate the power of future technology because they are based on what I call the “intuitive linear” view of technological progress rather than the “historical exponential view.” To express this another way, it is not the case that we will experience a hundred years of progress in the twenty-first century; rather we will witness on the order of twenty thousand years of progress (at today’s rate of progress, that is).” Ray Kurzweil http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns

(5) During the past 11 years, as the editor of the leading nanoscale technologies web portal, I read and posted over 50,000 articles about advanced and frequently mind-blowing technologies. I have closely followed the very rapid progress in our understanding and utilization of the unique properties of the nanoscale (which greatly differ from the properties that we already understand). At the very least, we are headed for a future that not one of us can predict; what we can predict is that we will undoubtedly see old myths about technologies shattered and changes beyond our current level of comprehension.

In response to a question posed by one of my oldest and most perceptive friends, I posted what follows to my Facebook profile.

Her question was posed after watching this video http://vimeo.com/15979195

"Rocky, am I really ignorant and paranoid?

It seems like this technology holds they key to either really, really good stuff for us as a species, or it has the potential for really really bad stuff.

I trust the science and the scientists. I don't trust the Money that controls what's done with the science.

Einstein was a really nice guy. He had no idea his science would be used for war. I don't think any of the Manhattan Project scientists went into it knowing what they were unleashing on the world."

~ Carla Conrad

My answer: A most perspicacious observation, and right on the mark. Occam’s Razor, 21st century style, meaning that you have hit upon the simplest explanation for the potential outcome; like every technological innovation in the past, nanoscale technologies have both the potential for tremendous good and/or tremendous bad. And don’t let my seemingly cavalier use of "tremendous" lull you into a false sense of security; I mean "tremendous" as in "things that have the potential to change everything we think we know about ourselves, while enabling each of us with the power to effect and experience our surroundings in ways heretofore only imagined."

I have been actively and intensely following nanoscale technologies since the early ‘90’s. At the end of the day, my most prescient observation would be that these technologies will have an impact on our global society many times greater than ALL past technological revolutions. Let me put it another way: nanoscale technologies - and the products thereof - will enable far greater change than our discovery, development and use of fire, bronze, iron, steel, electrical power, cars, planes and space travel put together.

Any person, institution or government entity that says "Oh yeah, nanotechnology, we got that handled" is lying their ass off. Equally, any person, institution or government entity that says "Oh yeah, nanotechnology, it’s gonna kill us all in one or more horrible ways" is also lying their ass off. Anyone that fervent usually has a hidden agenda, and one which serves a higher master. You’ll notice I said "usually" – many of my colleagues in the nanospace are humanitarians in the best sense and are talking about and planning for ways in which the good things can be emphasized and the bad minimized or eliminated.

My philosophy is summed up thus:

Nanotechnology will certainly play a pivotal role in our future; now, with the introduction of lighter/stronger materials in the auto, space, and military industries, and later, with the introduction of molecular manufacturing (making items per your specifications, in your own home, for pennies on the dollar of current prices – think "replicator" and you will not be too far off).

Expect to see revolutionary changes in solar, fuel cell and hydrogen storage technologies within the next few years. And expect to see a great deal of interest in and subsequent higher funding of nanotech-enabled sensor technologies for military, homeland security and civilian applications within the next few years. Put another (albeit obvious) way: expect to see cultural tsunamis of a magnitude that rival anything we have thus far experienced.

No informed person doubts that developments at the nanoscale will be significant. We debate the time frame, the magnitude and the possibilities, but not the likelihood for large-scale change. The least-speculative views suggest that we're in for changes of an order that justifies – if not demands – our undivided attention. Will we be ready? (BTW: not kidding, not even the weensiest amount)

OK, off my high horse and back to your previously programmed station…

In response to a question posed by one of my oldest and most perceptive friends, I posted what follows to my Facebook profile.

Her question was posed after watching this video http://vimeo.com/15979195

"Rocky, am I really ignorant and paranoid?

It seems like this technology holds they key to either really, really good stuff for us as a species, or it has the potential for really really bad stuff.

I trust the science and the scientists. I don't trust the Money that controls what's done with the science.

Einstein was a really nice guy. He had no idea his science would be used for war. I don't think any of the Manhattan Project scientists went into it knowing what they were unleashing on the world."

~ Carla Conrad

My answer: A most perspicacious observation, and right on the mark. Occam’s Razor, 21st century style, meaning that you have hit upon the simplest explanation for the potential outcome; like every technological innovation in the past, nanoscale technologies have both the potential for tremendous good and/or tremendous bad. And don’t let my seemingly cavalier use of "tremendous" lull you into a false sense of security; I mean "tremendous" as in "things that have the potential to change everything we think we know about ourselves, while enabling each of us with the power to effect and experience our surroundings in ways heretofore only imagined."

I have been actively and intensely following nanoscale technologies since the early ‘90’s. At the end of the day, my most prescient observation would be that these technologies will have an impact on our global society many times greater than ALL past technological revolutions. Let me put it another way: nanoscale technologies - and the products thereof - will enable far greater change than our discovery, development and use of fire, bronze, iron, steel, electrical power, cars, planes and space travel put together.

Any person, institution or government entity that says "Oh yeah, nanotechnology, we got that handled" is lying their ass off. Equally, any person, institution or government entity that says "Oh yeah, nanotechnology, it’s gonna kill us all in one or more horrible ways" is also lying their ass off. Anyone that fervent usually has a hidden agenda, and one which serves a higher master. You’ll notice I said "usually" – many of my colleagues in the nanospace are humanitarians in the best sense and are talking about and planning for ways in which the good things can be emphasized and the bad minimized or eliminated.

My philosophy is summed up thus:

Nanotechnology will certainly play a pivotal role in our future; now, with the introduction of lighter/stronger materials in the auto, space, and military industries, and later, with the introduction of molecular manufacturing (making items per your specifications, in your own home, for pennies on the dollar of current prices – think "replicator" and you will not be too far off).

Expect to see revolutionary changes in solar, fuel cell and hydrogen storage technologies within the next few years. And expect to see a great deal of interest in and subsequent higher funding of nanotech-enabled sensor technologies for military, homeland security and civilian applications within the next few years. Put another (albeit obvious) way: expect to see cultural tsunamis of a magnitude that rival anything we have thus far experienced.

No informed person doubts that developments at the nanoscale will be significant. We debate the time frame, the magnitude and the possibilities, but not the likelihood for large-scale change. The least-speculative views suggest that we're in for changes of an order that justifies – if not demands – our undivided attention. Will we be ready? (BTW: not kidding, not even the weensiest amount)

OK, off my high horse and back to your previously programmed station…