“Nobody Told Me I was a Nano-Consumer:” How Nanotechnologies Might Challenge the Notion of Consumer Rights

Abstract

Consumer rights, Nanotechnologies, Nano-enabled products, Consumer information,

Nanotechnology Risk Communication Past and Prologue

“…( 75,76 ) 21 There is also suggestive evidence that cosmetics are less likely now to be labeled as containing nanoparticles than they were a few years ago in the United States. ( 77 ) In Australia, which has the highest skin cancer rates in the world, over 250 registered sunscreens contain nanoparticles of titanium dioxide. ( 78 ) Advantages of incorporating titanium dioxide using nanotechnology are that it effectively blocks UV, has the potential to absorb UV at some wavelengths more effectively than conventional titanium dioxide, and is transparent rather than white.…”

“…In one risk perception study that did address nano applications in cosmetics, the vast majority of (Norwegian) consumers in the study were unaware of specific nano applications. ( 77 ) Nonetheless, nonprofits and advocacy groups have petitioned the FDA to regulate sunscreens more stringently, with some demanding the recall of nanotechnology products, and others demanding that FDA require full safety assessments of the use of engineered nanomaterials.…”

“…As John F. Kennedy proclaimed in 1962, consumers have a right to safety, to be informed, to choose, and to be heard. (77,95) Transparency, access to information, and meaningfulness to nonscientists are emphasized in the European Commission Code of conduct for responsible nanoscience and nanotechnologies research. The Code launched 26 in February 2008 with seven principles: that research should be (1) meaningful to the lay public; conducted in accordance with the principles of (2) sustainability and (3) precaution; open and inclusive, with (4) access to information for all stakeholders; and meet standards of (5) excellence, (6) innovation, and (7) accountability.…”

Comparative analysis of the labelling of nanotechnologies across four stakeholder groups

“…Australian studies have found that the public is concerned about the lack of potential regulations/testing for labelling (Market Attitude Research Services 2011 ) and supportive of government funding to rectify this (IPSOS Social Research Institute 2012 ). In a Norwegian study, participants highlighted concern regarding a regulatory framework that did not fully cover nanoproducts (Throne-Holst and Strandbakken 2009 ). This study drew out three key concerns: transparency (about the motives and criteria for labelling), accountability (those who set up the programme need to be accountable for it) and responsibility (someone needs to be responsible for it) (Throne-Holst and Rip 2011 ; Throne-Holst and Strandbakken 2009 ).…”

“…In a Norwegian study, participants highlighted concern regarding a regulatory framework that did not fully cover nanoproducts (Throne-Holst and Strandbakken 2009 ). This study drew out three key concerns: transparency (about the motives and criteria for labelling), accountability (those who set up the programme need to be accountable for it) and responsibility (someone needs to be responsible for it) (Throne-Holst and Rip 2011 ; Throne-Holst and Strandbakken 2009 ). A study in the United States showed the public have concerns regarding regulation, although they believed they would have little influence in the development of such regulation (Brown and Kuzma 2013 ).…”