Please be aware that this is a machine translation from French to English. AVICENN is not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translations but welcomes suggestions for reformulation.

VeilleNanos - Nanos in food: review of the current situation

Nanos in food: review of the current situation

image
News
+ Info sheets
Agenda

By the AVICENN team – Last modification September 2023

Presence of Nanos in food: what is the current situation?

Nanos are added to more than 900 food products: this was revealed by an ANSES survey in 20201Cf. Nanomaterials in food products, Anses opinion, May 2020. The figure rises to 4,300 products when we include manufactured nanomaterials whose presence is not necessarily established but nonetheless suspected.
Even though these figures date from before the 2020 ban on E171 in food, they are still huge. Yet, when you want to dig deeper, it is very difficult to identify precisely which food products contain these nanos and what they are used for. Let’s dig in together to try to better understand…

Nanos in our food products? Things are getting clearer

Unclear information on nanos in foodstuffs

It is actually very difficult to get a precise idea of nanotechnology applications in the food industry: little information is available on the types of nanomaterials under study or already in use, or on the corresponding quantities and uses, or on the companies involved.

According to a 2020 communication from ANSES, “the exhaustive identification of food products containing nanomaterials is very complex” 2ANSES opinion and report of 2020 are mainly based on the analysis of the Oqali and GNPD databases, which do not give a complete view of the market. Some of the obstacles are: the lack of sources allowing the identification of these products, the limits of the European regulation and the problems of definition of the term “nanomaterials”.

Due to this lack of reliable data, the “Yuka” or “Quel Produit?” (from Que Choisir) apps cannot advise on the presence or absence of nanos in products.

Companies are cautious when it comes to communication

Agri-food companies are, to say the least, “cautious” – not to say opaque – about their activities or uses of nanomaterials and/or nanotechnologies.

Without mentioning the [nano] labeling obligation which is not respected (see below), many organizations have failed to obtain information from food companies on the presence of nanomaterials in their products.

Some – hardly exemplary – examples…

As early as 2008 in the United States, the NGO As You Sow asked McDonald’s and Kraft Foods if they used nanomaterials in their food products and packaging. Their exchanges led these two American food giants to create a specific page on their respective websites3Nanotechnology” page of the www.aboutmcdonalds.com website: “McDonald’s Corporation is working to understand the use of nanotechnology and its application in food and packaging products. Given the current uncertainty related to potential impacts of nano-engineered materials, McDonald’s does not currently support the use by suppliers of nano-engineered materials in the production of any of our food, packaging and toys” – Content put online in 2008, unchanged since (as of May 2013),4Nanotechnology” page of the www.kraftfoodsgroup.com website: Currently we’re not using nanotechnology. But as a leading food company, we need to understand the potential this technology may hold for us in terms of food safety, product quality, nutrition and sustainability. That is why our research and development teams always keep their eyes on the scientific research, as well as consider potential applications where nanotechnology may be used in packaging material. (…) If we ever intend to use nanotechnology, we will make sure that the appropriate environmental, health and safety concerns have been addressed. This includes going through our own stringent quality-control processes, as well as working with our suppliers to make sure the proper assessments have been completed.” – Content put online in 2009, unchanged since (as of May 2013) where they claimed that they do not use nanotechnologies, while acknowledging that they were studying the possibilities they may offer5In 1999, Kraft Foods created a nanotechnology laboratory, then in 2000, a “Nanotek” consortium (involving fifteen universities and research laboratories) which it closed four years later, while continuing to work on this subject and to communicate with the FDA in the USA – see Nanotech-based synthetic food colorings, frying oil preservatives and packaging coated with antimicrobial agents have quietly entered the market, Informationliberation, 11 October 2006.

In 2012, the same NGO As You Sow sent a questionnaire to 2,500 food companies on their use (or not) of nanomaterials: only 26 companies responded (with only two of which declared that their products contained nanomaterials)6Cf. As You Sow, Slipping Through the Cracks: An Issue Brief on Nanomaterials in Foods, February 2013..

In 2013, when AVICENN conducted its investigation on nanos in food (posted as a dossier on veillenanos.fr and presented to the ANSES dialogue committee the same year), its questions to the industry went unanswered.

In 2014, Ofi AM surveyed 60 Stoxx 600 companies to find out about their use of nanoparticles: out of the 30 food industry companies surveyed , only 5 (all specializing in beverages) answered… that they did not use nanoparticles7Nanotechnologies, a new CSR issue?Hélène Canolle, Ofi AM, September 30, 2014 (slide 47).

In January 2015, the magazine 60 millions de consommateurs revealed that nearly 75 out of 100 food companies contacted (Nestlé, Danone, Heinz, Mars, Panzani, Nespresso, Toupargel, …) had not responded to the letter the magazine had sent them in October 2014 in which they were asked whether they used nanoparticles in the form of additives (E551, E550, E170, E171, E172), nanotextures, nanoencapsulated ingredients or nanomaterials used in food packaging8Food safety: are we eating food nanoparticles, 60 millions de consommateurs, No. 500, January 2015 and Nanoparticles in food: the law of silence, 60 millions de consommateurs, March 2015.

Since 2009, ANSES has, on numerous occasions, asked the food industry for more information on the presence of nanomaterials in their products, without receiving any meaningful response.

The r-nano register: a list of nano substances… without the possibility to identify the products that contain them

Since 2013, companies must declare each year, in the r-nano register, the nanomaterials they import, produce or distribute in France. However, the industry federations have influenced the design of the register in such a way that even ANSES, which manages the register, cannot know in which products the nanomaterials registered in the database are ultimately found.
The register is in the process of being improved to allow for better traceability.

To be followed upon…

Inventories often outdated, always fragmented

Inventories of everyday consumer products (including food products) containing nanos exist, but their reliability is limited because they are based on declarations by manufacturers or assumptions about the composition of products (often without any possible verification, due to lack of financial, human and/or technical resources). Furthermore, with the exception of the Danish NanoDatabase, they are not regularly updated.

And little or no mention on the labels

In 2014, “nano” labeling became mandatory on food products but the mentions [nano] are still extremely rare, as several associations and the DGCCRF have already pointed out.

Tests are now available to make up for the lack of information

Identifying food products that contain nanoparticles of concern has long been an (almost) impossible task – if one relies on publicly and freely available data. Fortunately, important metrological advances now make it possible to identify these nanoparticles and finally make them “visible”.

At the beginning of 2016, RTS (Radio Télévision Suisse) tried in vain to find a laboratory in Switzerland, Holland and Germany to test several products including a bottle of ketchup, but no laboratory was able to analyze them at that time9Cf. the program “A bon entendeur”: Nanoparticles in our plates, the big secret, May 3, 2016. In France, the National Laboratory of Metrology and Testing (LNE) has the equipment and expertise to do so10See in particular How to characterize and measure nanoparticles in food products, LNE, Webinar, February 2, 2017 and UT2A in Pau is also working on the detection of nanoparticles in food. These two laboratories work in particular for the DGCCRF. Other work is underway on the subject in France and abroad11Cf. Stakeholder workshop on small particles and nanoparticles in food, EFSA, 31 March – 1 April 2022.

Laboratory tests are currently the only solution available to associations and controlling authorities… but also to companies wishing to verify the claims (not always reliable) of their suppliers. These tests have the disadvantage of being very expensive, but it is only when presented with proof of the presence of nanoparticles in their products that some brands agree to consider the nano issue.

Tests conducted at associations and taxpayers’ expense

Since 2016, tests have been carried out at the expense of associations and taxpayers (for those carried out by the DGCCRF) each time highlighting the presence of nanoparticles in food in France, without the products containing them being labeled [nano], contrary to what regulations have required since 2014:

Tests carried out by NGOs in Europe
  • in 2016, the first tests of the association Agir pour l’Environnement established the presence of unlabeled nanoparticles in six products analyzed: LU cookies, Malabar chewing gums, blanquette de veau William Saurin and Carrefour spices, then candies “Têtes brûlées” raspberry taste and NEW’R chewing gums from Leclerc.
  • in August 2017, the magazine 60 Millions de consommateurs  revealed that the 18 products that were tested also contained nanomaterials12Cf. Stop aux nanoparticules, 60 Millions de consommateurs, Mensuel – No. 529 – September 2017 (published on August 27, 2017).
  • in January 2018, tests by the magazine Que Choisir identified nanoparticules in 7 food products13Nanoparticles – Attention, elles se cachent partout, Que Choisir, Mensuel n° 566, February 2018.
  • September 2018, Friends of the Earth Germany published results of the analysis of Jacobs cappuccino powder and Wrigleys chewing gum, containing 100% silicon dioxide nanoparticles (E551) and 8% titanium dioxide nanoparticles (E171) respectively14.Cf. Hintergrundpapier zu den BUND-Tests bei Wrigleys-Kaugummi und Jacobs-Cappuccino-Pulver , BUND (Friends of the Earth Germany), September 2018.
  • in May 2019, the Italian consumer association Altroconsumo published the results of tests conducted on food products, showing high levels of nanoparticles in food additives E171, E174 (silver) and E551 (silica) but not mentioned on the label15Cf. Nanoparticelle di additivi negli alimenti. Chidiamo il bando dell’E171Altroconsumo, May 2019.
  • in June 2019, the Belgian magazine Health Test revealed that E171 and E551 contained in the 9 food products tested contain nanoparticles, in varying proportions (ranging from 7 to 80% for the 6 products containing E171, 100% for the 3 products containing E551), without the mention [nano] on the packaging16Cf. “Nanomaterials – Everywhere without us knowing it,” Health Test No. 151, June 2019..
  • in July 2019, the Spanish magazine OCU-Compra Maestra also revealed that E171 and E551 contained in the 8 food products tested contain nanoparticles, in varying proportions (ranging from 27 to 76% for the 4 products containing E171, 100% for the 4 products containing E551), without the mention [nano] on the packaging17Cf. “Comemos nanopartículas sin saberlo,” OCU-Compra Maestra No. 449, July-August 2019.

Under pressure from associations, the DGCCRF (fraud control) has also conducted tests and their results were presented on several occasions18For example:
– On December 14, 2017, at the ANSES “nano and health” dialogue committee.
– On January 16, 2018, at the National Consumer Council (NCC) (see. the press release of the Ministry of Economy), then to AVICENN, Agir pour l’Environnement and France Nature Environnement (FNE)
– On March 29, 2018, at LNE’s “nanomaterials and cosmetics” technical day
– On April 10, 2018, during a roundtable discussion, organized by the Ministry of Economy, bringing together professionals on the presence of nanoparticles in food products
– On November 26, 2018, at the ANSES “nano and health” dialogue committee
. These confirmed the observations made by the associations: in almost all the food products tested and composed of additives, nanoparticles were detected… without any [nano] label.

In keeping with these efforts, AVICENN has performed a number of product tests on over 20 everyday consumer products, including food products in which unlabeled nanoparticles have been identified (silica nanoparticles in a Knorr soup sachet, Aoste ham, Herta pie crust, Guigoz infant milk, Solgar vitamin C).

Tests and controls have made companies more accountable

The entire industry is now aware of the labeling obligations and the risks for the consumer. More and more brands and distributors want to market “nano-free” products (so as not to have to label them and/or as a precautionary measure) and several brands and distributors are committed to removing nanoparticles (or additives containing them) from their products.

Brand and distributor commitments
  • In 2017, Système U included “substances in the nanoparticulate state” in the list of 90 controversial substances for which it has implemented a “Substitution Policy” (for U-brand products).
  • In 2017, Synadiet, the national union for food supplements, set up a dedicated project group that identified two areas of work19Cf. 2017 Activity Report, Synadiet, 2018:
    – identification of ingredients that may be used in the form of nanoparticles in food supplements, including a survey of suppliers of these substances
    – a work on the nano alternatives that exist or are being studied, the objective being to propose a “catalog of alternatives”, and to list the analytical difficulties encountered and the solutions found. Avicenn has asked Synadiet several times for more information, without getting any feedback.
  • By mid 2018, there were commitments from, for example William Saurin, Mars, Lutti, Verquin, Sainte-Lucie, Picard, Manufacture Cluizel, Motta, Malabar, Fleury Michon, as well as Carrefour, Leclerc, Auchan, Système U*, and the list grew even longer in October 2018 with Casino and in November 2018, with the famous M&M’s peanut from Mars (see the
    “green list”
    of infonano.org).
  • At the end of June 2018, the National Confectionery Union released its
    charter of ethics
    in which 100% of confectioners “have committed to removing titanium dioxide from their products”. The charter formalizes a decision made back in 2017: 90% of confectioners had already eliminated E171 by mid-2018. “Science is advancing, and so are safety requirements. We have to go beyond the regulations and anticipate consumer expectations”,
    said Florence Pradier, secretary general of “Confiseurs de France”.
  • Since 2018, the Italian group Perfetti Van Melle, owner of Mentos and Chupa Chups lollipops, has removed E171, composed of (nano)particles of titanium dioxide, from all of its recipes20How Mentos and Chupa Chups have managed to do without titanium dioxide, L’Usine nouvelle, 2 January 2020.
  • In December 2019, Agir pour l’Environnement published a
    list of brands and retailers that have removed E171 from their products
    . The NGO had identified less than 30 products containing E171.
Système U campaign, 2017 – “nanoparticulate substances” are part of the 90 “controversial substances”

Many brands now demand “nano-free” ingredients from their suppliers, and have the option of coercing them or demanding penalties if they fail to meet their contractual obligations.

However, companies should be careful: brands are ultimately responsible if it turns out that their suppliers’ attestations (certifying that the ingredients are not nanomaterials) are incomplete or erroneous. They are obliged to check what they put in their products and, in case of failure, can be prosecuted.

Which nanosubstances are used for which effects?

Nano applications in foodstuffs

Which nanos are we talking about?

In its May 2020 report on manufactured nanomaterials in food, ANSES lists at least 37 nano substances used as food additives or ingredients (in more than 900 food products) :

  • 7 substances for which the presence of nanoparticles is“proven“:
    • calcium carbonate
    • titanium dioxide (TiO2)*21The report is based on data prior to the entry into force of the E171 ban in France in 2020
    • iron oxides and hydroxides
    • calcium silicate
    • tricalcium phosphates
    • synthetic amorphous silicas (SAS)
    • organic and composite compounds
  • and 30 substances where it is “suspected”, including aluminum, silver, gold, magnesium phosphates, ferric ammonium citrate, sodium, potassium and calcium salts of fatty acids, etc.

For which effects?

According to ANSES, two main technological functionalities are being considered for nanos in food:

  • improving the product or its palatability (nanos are used to modify the food’s structure, color and texture)
  • increasing the product bioavailability
Anses report, May 2020

In June 2021, EFSA published a report on the physicochemical characterization of nanoparticles in food additives, which states:

  • between 64 and 73% of titanium dioxide nanoparticles were present in E171 additives on the market (it was not yet banned in the EU at the time)
  • over 97% silver particles in E174 additives
  • no gold nanoparticles were detected in additive E175.

Here is a list of existing and future applications based on scientific and marketing literature:

Applications presented as innovative solutions to nutritional and/or health problems

For the past twenty years, the promises of nano applications in food have been flourishing22Nanotechnology will revolutionize the food system (and other familiar sentences): the company’s products are more tasty, less salty, less fatty, enriched in vitamin, more colorful, etc. Not only many voices have been deploring the lack of analysis on the associated  risks, but the feasibility and/or the real value of these promises are also questionable.

Indeed, it seems that there are not so many of these applications:

  • lower fat 23Cf. Nanotechnologies used to develop low-fat dairy innovations, Food ingredients first, Aug. 29, 2017, salt24Cf. Nanotechnology helps food manufacturers make healthier food, July 30, 2012 : “A novel product from Tate & Lyle, Soda-lo, was one of only a few products being marketed, he said. It enabled added salt levels to be reduced by up to 30% in foods such as bread, pizza bases, pastry, savoury pie fillings, cheese and baked snacks, without loss of flavour or structure., calories or emulsifier content in foods, without altering their taste (the ratio of surface area to volume is greater at the nanoscale, and the same weight of fat or salt in nanoscale form can cover a larger area of the food surface).
  • fight against food poisoning: nanoparticles can be used to fight against food infections caused by pathogens (such as E. coli or salmonella bacteria for example).
Applications for technical usages, without nutritional or health benefits


A
dditives anti-caking agents :

  • nanoparticles of silica dioxide (SiO2: E550/551) used to absorb moisture and prevent the agglomeration of powders (salt, sugar, spices, cocoa, instant soups and noodles, seasonings for ground meat and burrito or guacamole, etc.)27Note: the only product containing silica labeled [nano] identified between 2014 and 2016 was an Auchan tomato powder, spotted by the consumer association CLCV. But a few other products containing silica were then spotted with the mention [nano].
  • nanoparticles of calcium carbonate (E170) and magnesium oxide (E530)

Modification of the aroma, flavor, color and texture in food:

Applications to extend product shelf life

Most of the products concerned are also those used by children, a more sensitive category of the population: infant milks, ice creams and sorbets and breakfast cereals, among others but what are the health risks?

Since the ban of E171 in food in France in 2020 and in Europe in 2022, alternatives have been marketed, without the possibility to determine whether their safety is guaranteed:

What about materials in contact with food?

Nano research projects in the field of food packaging result in numerous academic publications on the subject37Cf. Applications of nano-materials in food packaging: A review, Adeyeye SA and Ashaolu TJ, Journal of Food Process Engineering, 44 (7), July 2021. They are becoming more complex and are now also being extended to applications such as biological nanosensors incorporated into so-called “smart” packaging to check that the cold chain has been respected, to ensure the traceability of foodstuffs or to detect and report deterioration, bacteria or contaminants in foodstuffs38See for example:
A sensor to measure the freshness of packaged foods, Techniques de l’ingénieur, April 2020
Packaging goes “smart”, Swiss Info, March 25, 2013
Gold Nanoparticle-Modified Carbon Electrode Biosensor for the Detection of Listeria monocytogenes, Industrial Biotechnology, 9(1): 31-36, February 2013.
.

In 2013 in France, the National Research Agency (ANR) included in its call for P2N (Nanotechnologies and Nanosystems) projects, among others, a call to support research on “the contribution of nanotechnologies to smart packaging and coatings”39Call for Nanotechnologies and Nanosystems P2N projects, French National Research Agency, 2013 Edition. For information on the work underway in France, see in particular the report of the Joint Consultative Ethics Committee for Agricultural Research, CIRAD / INRA, Avis sur les nanosciences et les nanotechnologies, December 2012, part 4.. The European project NanoPack was awarded €7.7 million by the European Union as part of Horizon 2020, to develop nanotechnology-based antimicrobial packaging to improve food safety and reduce food waste407.7 million euros for NanoPack smart packaging, Agromedia.co.uk, October 2017.

Which nanos for which uses in food packaging?

Nanotechnology applications in materials in contact with food (MCDA) include packaging, cutting surfaces, kitchen utensils, refrigerator walls, water filters, etc.

Their purpose is to:

  • enhance their strength, rigidity and resistance to degradation: titanium nano nitride to prevent scratches on plastic packaging, for example
  • increase transparency (plastic packaging)
  • improve food preservation by protecting food and beverages against:
  • or promote more fluid sauces 42Nano coating gets all the ketchup out of the bottle, Packaging News, May 23, 2012.

In the 2020 ANSES report, are identified:

  • 5 nanos substances used in the formulation of MCDAs for which the presence of nanos is proven:
    • silver,
    • zinc oxide,
    • titanium nitride,
    • carbon black,
    • silicon dioxide.
  • 11 substances in which the presence of manufactured nanos is suspected: iron oxide, gold, platinum, titanium dioxide, titanium dioxide coated with octyltriethoxysilane, modified montmorillonite, silver zeolite, zero-valent iron kaolinite, zero-valent iron bentonite, iron bentonite, iron zeolite.

In the context of the tests of everyday consumer products carried out by AVICENN in 2022, nanoparticles of titanium dioxide were identified in the only packaging tested: an absorbent wipe of a chicken portion “Le Gaulois”.

Concerns about transfer of nanos from packaging to food

One question concerns the possible migration of nanomaterials from packaging (or from the surface coatings of cooking utensils) to the foodstuffs they contain or with which they come into contact. The ways this transfer occurs and the risks it could entail are still largely unknown and could vary greatly, since multiple factors come into play (temperature, duration of packaging, nature of the packaged foodstuffs: liquids or solids, etc.). The migration of chemicals (nano or not) contained in food packaging to the foodstuffs they contain is clearly a major issue for the years to come43On the migration of nanoparticles or their residues from packaging to food, see in particular:
Nano-Food Packaging: An Overview of Market, Migration Research, and Safety Regulations, Journal of Food Science, Bumbudsanpharoke N and Ko S, 80(5), May 2015
– Kuorwel KK et al, Review of Mechanical Properties, Migration, and Potential Applications in Active Food Packaging Systems Containing Nanoclays and Nanosilver, Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 2015
– Muncke, J. et al, Food packaging and migration of food contact materials: will epidemiologists rise to the neotoxic challenge?“, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, July 2014
.

According to the 2020 ANSES report, “Migration has been described as unlikely when these nanomaterials are integrated into the matrix of packaging intended, for example, to modify their structures or their mechanical, thermal and UV resistance. However, the voluntary contact of these nanomaterials with the food matrix, especially in the case of antimicrobial applications (silver nanomaterials in particular), can promote their transfer into food. Studies have shown the migration of silver nanomaterials, used as antimicrobials, from plastic materials.”

Not to mention another major question posed by these nano-additive packages: what is their environmental impact and behavior when discarded? and what impact will they have on ecosystems? Have the packaging processing industries begun to anticipate the issues associated with recycling packaging containing antimicrobial substances, fungicides, etc.? Nothing is less certain…

Nanos in “edible coatings”?

Waxes and other coating agents are allowed on certain fruits and vegetables in the European Union. If the regulations do not authorize nanoparticles in these uses at this stage, research is conducted in this direction, touting the benefits of solutions based on nanoparticles of silver, or titanium dioxide or zinc in particular, applied directly to fruits for example (strawberries, apricots, peaches, etc.), to improve their preservation44See for example:
Enhanced shelf-life of peach fruit in alginate based edible coating loaded with TiO2 nanoparticles, Khan OA et al., Progress in Organic Coatings, 182, September 2023 (an article reported by European Coatings)
Titanium dioxide nanomaterials coated films in food packaging: a mini review, Remya RR and Julius A, Vegetos, 2022
Nanotechnology-enhanced edible coating application on climacteric fruits, Odetayo T et al, Food Science & Nutrition, 2022
Impact of Starch Coating Embedded with Silver Nanoparticles on Strawberry Storage Time, Taha I M et al, Polymers, 1;14(7): 1439, 2022
Preparation and characterization of silver nanoparticles and their use for improving the quality of apricot fruits, Shahat M et al, Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Research, 45(1): 38-55, 2020
Antimicrobial Nanoparticles Incorporated in Edible Coatings and Films for the Preservation of Fruits and Vegetables, Xing Y et al, Molecules, 24, 2019
.

Indirect sources of nano contamination in our food supply

In addition to the routes of entry mentioned above (migration from packaging or direct applications in foodstuffs), residues of manufactured nanomaterials may be present in our digestive tract from a variety of sources.

Contamination via animal feed, fertilizers and pesticides

Nanomaterials in animal feed45See for example:
– in French: Association colistine – nanoparticles: less antibiotic for a preserved effectiveness, Anses, June 3, 2022
Application of encapsulated nano materials as feed additive in livestock and poultry: a review, Rajendran D et al, Veterinary Research Communications , 46 : 315-328, 2022
and/or plant protection products and fertilizers (and those present in the sludge from wastewater treatment plants used as fertilizer) could move up the food chain46See for example:
– a researcher and industry perspective: Center of Innovation for Nanobiotechnolgy (COIN), Agriculture Nanotechnology: Early-Stage, but Growing, October 2011 ;
– an NGO perspective: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), Nanomaterials In Soil – Our Future Food Chain?
. Knowledge about the use of nanomaterials as pesticides or fertilizers is still very sketchy47Nanopesticides State of Knowledge, Environmental Fate, and Exposure Modeling, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 43 (16), July 2013; Chemical companies now adding untested nanoparticles to pesticide formulas, Natural News, January 13, 2014but it has been shown, for example, that nanoparticles contained in sprayed pesticides can penetrate the skin of fruits and vegetables48Cf. Detection of Engineered Silver Nanoparticle Contamination in Pears, J Agric Food Chem, 2012; 60 (43):10762-7(an abstract and commentary in French was published byANSES in March 2013)..

An environment polluted by nanomaterial residues

More generally, residues of manufactured nanomaterials may also be present in our food without having been intentionally introduced by the agri-food industry, but more prosaically due to the release and dispersion of manufactured nanomaterials in the environment and their transfer into the food chain:

Source: Cedervall et. al, Food chain transport of nanoparticles affects behavior and fat metabolism in fish, PLoS ONE, 2012.

Any questions or comments? This information sheet compiled by AVICENN is intended to be completed and updated. Please feel free to contribute.

Upcoming Nano Agenda

27
Fév.
2024
Global Webinar on Nanotechnology and Nanoscience (Online)
On line
Seminar
  • 3rd edition of the Global Webinar on Nanotechnology and Nanoscience
  • February 27 to 28, 2024
  • Organizers: Global Scientific Guild
  • Main theme: Insights and Innovations in Nanotechnology and Nano Science: Progressing to the future

6
Mars
2024
Managing the risks associated with nanomaterials (CEA, Grenoble)
Grenoble
Training
  • Awareness-raising aimed at personnel in contact with nanomaterials during research, formulation, production, maintenance, cleaning, upkeep, etc., as well as safety coordinators or engineers, facility managers, heads of laboratories where nanoparticles are handled.
  • Organizers: INSTN Grenoble (CEA)
  • On the agenda: potential impact on health; metrology and protection; control of potential risks associated with nanomaterials; consideration of societal aspects.
  • Website: https: //instn.cea.fr/formation/maitrise-des-risques-lies-aux-nanomateriaux-sensibilisation
14
Mars
2024
Nanoparticles in everyday products (ATC, Paris)
Paris
Training
  • This module is part of the training program “Interactions between toxic chemicals and the human organism”, open to anyone with a basic scientific education (bachelor’s degree or professional experience).
  • Organizers: Association Toxicologie Chimie(ATC)
  • Speaker : Nicole PROUST, Research Engineer, CNRS Honorary Research Director, Specialist in Nanotechnologies, Arsenic, Electromagnetic Waves, Palaiseau, France
  • Website: www.atctoxicologie.fr/notre-formation.html

Sheet initially created in May 2013


Notes and references

Our monitoring, information and actions need you to continue !