Nanoregulation

Abstract

In March this year, the German and then the international press reported that people had become sick after using Magic‐Nano products (Kleinmann GmbH; Sonnenbuehl, Germany): aerosols designed to coat glass and ceramic with a protective, dirt‐repellent film. Within days, about 100 consumers became ill with symptoms such as coughing, headaches, sleep disruption and vomiting. A small number were hospitalized with pulmonary oedema, but most recovered in a matter of days. The health scare renewed fears of nanotech products in Germany, the only country where the product was marketed, and the press had a field day reporting on the first “nano‐recall” as authorities pulled the product from the shelves. After investigation, the German government and Kleinmann's supplier, Nanopool GmbH (Schwalbach, Germany), concluded that the problem was not with the nano‐components of the aerosol. According to Rene Zimmer of the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment in Berlin, Germany, “In the Magic‐Nano case, not only no nanoparticles but also no silanes [the substance responsible for creating a nano‐structured surface] were inside the bottle.” Ralf Jurgens, a senior technologist with Nanopool, said the problem apparently related to pH levels in the aerosol: for still unexplained reasons, the original pH of the formulation was 2.4, which was increased to almost 8 through the addition of NaOH. The silica then sedimented as a white powder on the bottom of the container, “so the bottles that went to the stores didn't contain any silicon, silanes or silicon dioxide. And without silanes… there is no nanolayer/nanocoating which turns a substrate into a hydrophobic surface,” said Jurgens. He noted that as consumers “sprayed like hell”, they released an ultrafine aerosol mist containing ethanol and water, which irritated their lungs. So the first ‘nano scare’ did not actually involve any nanoparticles. But the incident did raise questions about the risks …