Carbon nanotubes causing asbestos-like effects in lab mice

The scientific and engineering possibilities of carbon nanotubes are hard to overestimate, but a study out of the UK might put a damper on the small-scale party for a while: mice injected with certain lengths of nanotubes developed lung problems similar to those caused by asbestos. Apparently the long, straight shape of the nanotubes causes problems for the lining of the lungs designed to deal with particulate matter, which can cause scarring, inflammation, and "probably cancer in the long term." That's a big "probably," however -- researchers say they're a long way from actually proving the link between long nanotubes and cancer, but no one's denying that it's troublesome, including the Nanotechnology Industries Association, which told the BBC that "there could be reason for concern... but it needs to be validated." It also seems like the focus is on handling the tech correctly, which is promising -- we'll keep an eye on how this plays out.

[Thanks, TC]

[Adam Zey @ May 21st 2008 5:16AM]

This is pretty meaningless; breathing in any particulate is going to cause major issues, like silicosis. So here's a hint: Don't inject carbon nanotubes into your lungs.

[Wonderkid @ May 21st 2008 8:29AM]

You don't have to inject asbestos or other particles to get lung cancer (asbestososis killed my grandfather BTW), you only need to breath the particles. We are headed into a future where thanks to our failure to consider the consequences of what we're flooding our sensitive bodies with, a lot of people are going to die very slow and painful deaths over the next few decades. It's not a grand conspiracy, it is firing our gun before aiming it.

[Mike10010100 @ May 21st 2008 6:12AM]

@Wonderkid

Yeah, but the last time i checked, they weren't going to make ceiling insulation out of carbon nanotubes. If you breathe in powdered silicon, you'd probably get cancer, so should we stop making computer chips? Non sequitor.

[gad get @ May 21st 2008 6:33AM]

The point is that this stuff needs to be used properly, and not be allowed to get into the environment.

So nobody use carbon nanotubes in your sandbox!

[SanHolo @ May 21st 2008 9:48AM]

No, Adam Zey, this is not at all meaningless. Asbestos is only a problem because the body can't deal with it like with many many other particulate matters. Macrophages in the lung take up Asbestos and after that, they can't do anything with it (like digest and break it down). That's not the case for many other particles, but it seems to be true for carbon Nanotubes, too, and that's a problem.

[Riley @ May 21st 2008 12:18PM]

I thought the problem was that these tubes were replacing the lining that was supposed to take care of the particulates...not that the tubes were the cause of the particulate?

[Cassini @ May 21st 2008 6:07AM]

So much for that space elevator. At least for a long while (for more reasons that one).

[Cassini @ May 21st 2008 6:10AM]

Correction: "...for more reasons than one."

-Engadget: Can we *please* get comment editing capabilities? We've only been waiting years and years for it.

[Twitchy @ May 21st 2008 8:03AM]

Those of you in the USofA have nothing to worry about - Nano technology is evil and will be outlawed soon, right after legislation is introduced to ensure creationism is educated as an alternative theory to evolution.

[iczer2 @ May 21st 2008 8:39AM]

..Except for use in the manufacture of more weapons and stuff to blow things up. We will never compromise in our ability to send stuff into oblivion.

*sniff* Brings a tear to my eye. Makes me proud to be an American. *cue anthem in the background with fireworks accompaniment*

[wako @ May 21st 2008 8:19AM]

its not like nanotubes will be EVERYWHERE like how asbestos was used. I dont see whats the big deal here. There are MANY things in the textile industry that can give you cancer if you breathe it in. Thats why they have masks on for those people who are handling it!

***NEWS ALERT***
There are carcinogens in plastics as well! Should we stop using it too?!

[facebookfake @ May 21st 2008 12:42PM]

Response to that jackass of a NEWS ALERT:

In the longterm yes, we should stop using non biodegradable plastics. When plastics were first developed they were envisioned for long use activities, seeing as they last forever. Instead we use plastic on throwaway products.

And as for the masks people wear in the textile industry, they don't really do all that much. It's like the duck-and-cover turtle from the 50's. It's there to make you feel safer. Nostril cancer among weavers in the textile industry is still above the cancer average of the general population.

[SirWalksAlot @ May 21st 2008 8:43AM]

I'm tired of people wasting money on studies about what CAUSES cancer and not spending that money on CURING it.

[SanHolo @ May 21st 2008 9:48AM]

So, what do you do to cure cancer?

[facebookfake @ May 21st 2008 12:44PM]

Right. You're brilliant. Let's not worry about the why. That wouldn't make sense at all would it.

[Tom @ May 21st 2008 9:02AM]

Your lungs can handle normal sized dust that our "cavemen" ancestors did. But any particulate matter smaller than a certain radius can't be handled by your lungs, in general. We just didn't evolve in a world with such micro- and nano- hazards.

WTC releif workers are suffering from numerous pulmonary problems from the fine dust of pulverized concrete, asbestos, and other building materials. So it wouldn't be surprising that nano particles of anything, in sufficient quantities, would cause cancer or other pulmonary problems.

[Tom @ May 21st 2008 9:08AM]

Would be nice, but prevention is always easier than curing. And sometimes the cure itself isn't very pleasant.

[Chris Aubeck @ May 21st 2008 11:37AM]

And what's even worse, mice won't listen to reason. We'll be hearing about cases like this for years to come, you'll see.

[ecobore @ May 21st 2008 9:28AM]

Actually I believe that skylights are already being made using carbon nanotubes. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to visualise these being filed or ground down with an angle grinder in an installation situation. (but saying that, the same is true with fibre-glass and breathing that in as a fine powder is not going to do your lungs any good either!)

[Dave @ May 21st 2008 6:51AM]

Carbon Fibre and Carbon Nanotubes are not the same thing.
Nanotubes are (currently) VERY expensive and there’s no way they'd be used for something like a skylight.
Carbon Fibre however is relatively cheap, certainly cheap enough to make lightweight fittings out of.

[Sma @ May 21st 2008 2:28PM]

Carbon Fiber is almost the same thing as fiber glass, but stronger and weighs less I believe. Carbon fiber is a bit more expensive than fiber glass also(atleast the sheet kind used to make car bodies. Fiber glass dust, and insulation fiber glass is bad to get on your skin (makes you itch like crazy) and if it gets in your lungs it'll make you cough, and I'd imagine prolonged exposure to it could cause serious lung problems.

[ecobore @ May 21st 2008 9:28AM]

This is a no-brainer!
When we breath in particulates which our body cannot break down we damage our lungs. If they accumulate sufficiently they can be, (and often are) the cause of cancer. End of story.

[gad get @ May 21st 2008 6:36AM]

In fact, it's just the beginning....

*Cue ominous music.*

[ecobore @ May 21st 2008 9:33AM]

My apologies,
the skylights incorporate nanogel (I don't know if this uses nano tubes or not!)
http://www.azonano.com/news.asp?newsID=4030

[markcih @ May 21st 2008 11:44AM]

It's old news. Apparently anyone following the "Stanton protocol" of injecting or implanting materials into pleural cavities of tumor-susceptible rats (Sprague Dawley breed) will cause tumors that may indicate potential mesothelioma.

So as long as you do not inject fiberglass, nanotubes, sand, clay, polystyrene, dirt (all have tested 'positive') into your pleural cavity you are probably ok.

Asbestos is also a natural mineral fiber - no matter where you live you breath in millions of fibers a year. Lung cancer is not asbestosis; asbestos is an -osis disease like brucellosis or bysinnosis or silicosis where exposure to the causative agent leads to lung scarring that reduces lung capacity leading to death by heart failure. It is drastically exacerbated by smoking.

Nanoparticles exist already in the environment, from dust being weathered down and combustion products. Note that basically below a certain aerodynamic size they just go in and out of your lungs, like flotsam and jetsam on the tide.

I think too many people see "nano-" and envision either "The Diamond Age" come to life or Raquel Welch in "Fantastic Voyage". (in that a nanoparticle in your pocket or are you happy to see me?)

[Benhur @ May 21st 2008 11:54AM]

Well, I for one am glad that unlike past incidents, they're actually checking these materilas before they put them to market. Which is good, you "I dont care, if its faster, give me cancer" gadget freaks.

[Tony Bowman @ May 21st 2008 12:17PM]

any coalminer could have told you that breathing carbon is bad for you.

[Rick @ May 21st 2008 1:38PM]

Hey, they can't prove it causes cancer, go ahead and sell the damn thing so we can get rich! They'll all be dead by the time anyone wises up and we'll be rich!

[roflercopterer @ May 21st 2008 2:10PM]

Darn you TC!

[Ian @ May 21st 2008 4:39PM]

umm so what products are these things going to be in? last i heard was that they are going into batteries, i dont know about you but i dont plan on breaking open any batteries and inhaling anything from inside it.

[stevediesel @ May 21st 2008 8:06PM]

isnt it 10x stronger than diamond so cant be broken down