Of course, there are valid arguments against the use of nanomedicine, particularly around the issue of toxicity. As explained in the Scientific American article Nano-risks: A Big Need for a Little Testing, Elements at these microscopic levels can exhibit different properties than they do normally. Furthermore, every nanoparticle is unique, and sometimes the effects or two of the same nanoparticles are not consistent. Thus, some nanoparticles might become dangerous for humans. It has been shown [Young and Martel, 2009] that even nanoparticles that naturally occur in our body can have a serious effect on both our short term and long term health. If these naturally created nanoparticles can harm us, then it would not be wise to proceed with using ones that are artificially engineered with first considering the possible effects and consequences. If nanomedicine was expanded to nanorobotics, then we would need to consider the possible effects of a glitch in the programming, and how sever the effects must be. This reminds us that before nanomedicine can be used extensively, it will need to go through a rigorous process of testing to make sure itdoesn'tdo more harm than good. Another disadvantage of nanotechnology is the enormous financial costs associated with it. As said in a report by the ETC group, Nanotech Rx, the global health crisisdoesn'tstem from a lack of science innovation or medical technologies; the root problem is poverty and inequality. New medical technologies are irrelevant for poor people if theyaren'taccessible or affordable. There is the problem that nanomedicine will definitely be too expensive for the average citizen, at least at first. It raises a question on whether we should focus instead on improving key aspects of the health system and providing better access to medicine and infrastructure I less developed countries. As the ETC says, access to clean water could make a greater contribution to global health than any single medical intervention. If we cant even maintain a working system using the current possibilities of medicine, should we start by fixing whats wrong before looking at something new, wasting billions of dollars in the process? Finally, nanomedicine, like all technology, can also be used for malicious purposes. Much of the proposed technology and treatment that nanomedicine will bring can be used for purposes other than originally intended. This leads to problems of ethics and privacy. Nanorobots that could monitor the level of insulin in people in diabetes could also be misused by government and corporations trying to increase surveillance of citizens. Such technology can also be used for military purposes. And where should we draw the line in the practical use of nanomedicine? To illustrate, if such technology allows us to heal people who have lost their vision or damaged their brain, either by an accident or through natural causes, should this technology be released to the general public, allowing people to have biotech implants that give them superior vision or mental abilities? Should this be extended to military purposes? If so, then to what extent? There are many moral and ethical dilemmas regarding nanomedicine that must be answered before this technology is put to use.
Follow this link:
Disadvantages of Nanomedicine - Nanomedicine
Recommendation and review posted by G. Smith