Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

International standards for risk management in nanotechnology

Nature Nanotechnology volume 4, pages 205–206 (2009)Cite this article

Murashov and Howard reply — We thank Peter Hatto for reminding readers about the principle of consensus on which the International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) process is based. In fact, the main objective of our article1 was to ensure that such a consensus is based on informed decisions and is reached as a result of all stakeholders and experts in the global community participating actively in the ISO process.

We would like to reiterate that in the presence of incomplete risk information about nanomaterials, prudent measures should be taken to minimize exposure in the workplace. However, this does not require occupational exposure limits (OELs) to be established before any actions can be taken and, given the limited amount of health information, it may be premature to recommend OELs for specific nanomaterials. The problem with “assumed” OELs — such as those described in BSI PD 6699-2 — is that they could have adverse human and societal effects if used within the traditional risk-management framework. Specifically, they might not be protective enough and give a false sense of security leading to potential adverse health effects in the future. Or they might be overly protective, requiring employers to implement unnecessary exposure mitigation techniques (for example, comprehensive engineering controls) that could be prohibitively costly and, therefore, unduly restrict innovation, and/or require workers to wear highly protective personal protective equipment that may introduce other health and safety risks. Moreover, technology may not exist to assess exposure using the “assumed” OEL metric of interest.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Murashov, V. & Howard, J. Nature Nanotech. 3, 635–636 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Murashov, V. & Howard, J. Nature Nanotech. (in the press).

  3. Naumann, B. D. et al. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 57, 33–42 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Paik, S. Y., Zalk, D. M. & Swuste, P. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 52, 419–428 (2008).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. NIOSH Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology: An Information Exchange with NIOSH (2006); available at <http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/nanotech/safenano/>.

  6. <http://tinyurl.com/48cxwc>

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Washington DC 20201, USA vladimir.murashov@cdc.hhs.gov,

    Vladimir Murashov & John Howard

Authors
  1. Vladimir Murashov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Howard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Murashov, V., Howard, J. International standards for risk management in nanotechnology. Nature Nanotech 4, 205–206 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2009.108

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2009.108

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing