Sir

Your Editorial on engaging the public over nanotechnology ('Enough talk already' Nature 448, 1–2; doi:10.1038/448001b 2007) captured many of the key achievements stemming from the convergence of high technology and new democratic practice, as well as the challenges still faced.

As director of the public-participation organization Involve (http://www.involve.org.uk), I would like to add that we need a more mature relationship between science and society, whereby both sides are open about their concerns and aspirations and realistic about what they can offer.

Too often science is equated to evidence. But having, in an earlier role, commissioned scientific research for the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, I am aware that the answer you get can depend to a large extent on who does the research and how their contract is configured. Because trust is built through experiencing openness and honesty, the public need to understand science, warts and all.

A good start would be to move away from portraying narrowly calculated technological risks as accepted facts (when they rarely are) to being open about the great expanse of uncertainty that scientists are constantly navigating.

Science is almost always a journey into the unknown. That includes unpredictable benefits and uncertain costs.