Comments on: Public approval for using nanotechnology for human enhancement limited to improving health

By: sarah

sarah — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:03:17 +0000

I agree with you, Vincent Christian when you say ” As a society, I feel we should be open to all possibilities in the name of human enhancement and ultimately improving the health of society at large”. I have recently returned from a yoga retreat in Spain Culturally Spain are generally backing nanotechnology, with an open mind regarding developments in healthcare.

By: Dan Claybor

Dan Claybor — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 01:36:33 +0000

Although I agree that nanotechnology will , in theory; improve health and ultimately human enhancement, it will take a very long time for society to see the tangible results. In the meantime there are additional measure we can take to improve health & human enhancement such as being more mindful of global warming, fixing our educational system—(going to college is becoming unaffordable); perhaps taxing “Fast Food” like we tax alcohol and tobacco, and lastly; change our tax structure. Right now, the middle class pays the highest tax rate on a percentage basis in the U.S.. and as a result; the middle class in America is slowly disappearing. The Public needs more of a voice in where our government spends our tax dollars in the name of health and human enhancement!

By: Peter D

Peter D — Mon, 23 May 2011 22:36:53 +0000

In reference to the last sentence in the report above, “In the unlikely event the US military were constrained from using such technologies, it seems to me very unlikely that other military establishments worldwide would be similarly constrained”, this implies that if our military and government forge ahead with nanotechnology we should forbid our adversaries from developing their own. This could be yet another “global police” role not unlike our efforts to forbid other countries from having nuclear capabilities. I think nanotechnology alone shows a lot of promise for the benefit of mankind. I am just saddened that this could become another reason for us to stick our noses into someone else’s business.

By: vincent christian

vincent christian — Wed, 11 May 2011 07:57:22 +0000

@ Kent

I agree with you that emerging technology will force the market to change. However—lets not forget the other forces that inevitably force markets to change, e.g. (Economic, Political, Legal, etc), just to name a few. As a society, I feel we should be open to all possibilities in the name of human enhancement and ultimately improving the health of society at large.

By: KentB

KentB — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:35:25 +0000

Ultimately, the technology will force the market to change, not the other way around. Let’s say that the US outlaws intelligence-enhancing nanotech. Whoever else in the world decides to use it will not just be a little ahead, but very far ahead in technological development, basic and applied science, etc. It will be situation of change or be left very far behind.

By: Nanoman

Nanoman — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:05:26 +0000

There is an idea called “Safe Tech”. This is where a society takes the benefits from a technology such as nanotech, such as nano factories, and some medical devices, and computers but limits extreme body enhancements, genetic engineering, and so on and so forth, because of the claims of inherent dangers.

By: Jaquie Sharp

Jaquie Sharp — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 04:31:38 +0000

True, true Natasha Bell. I agree with the aspects of the rise nanotechnology will make to this counrty, and how it may boost the economys sales throughout the business world. Good luck with future research doctor.

By: Natasha Bell

Natasha Bell — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 04:28:27 +0000

This is basically coorporating all the elements of the production of nanotechnology and its main functions. Well written Jade, and the prduction in the workforce is sure to go upwards from now on. With the offer from the government to produce suitable army clothes using the basic elements of nanotechnology, the economy is certain to skyrocket. Thankyou.