User:RisefeSaweyi

A recent report of a group of researchers in NTU, Singapore, caught my attention i thought we would write something about nanotechnology in the cosmetics industry. The article, titled "Nano-sized chemical in sunscreen, cosmetics, could cause cancer, say scientists," was published November 29th on Yahoo News. A while after that, another number of researchers came up and said that this isn't true and it isn't a cause of concern. Just what exactly should we believe?

kosmetik Nanotechnology isn't new nevertheless it is often a term that has been recently mentioned serious amounts of again to raise awareness between the general public. People who have not heard from the term just before recent months think this is a good deal in the whole world of cosmetic research. And actually, it is. But not just in cosmetics and beauty. I have found it highly ironic how the field of beauty and personal care should seemingly be the one which generates probably the most speculation and desire for nanotechnology because nanotechnology itself is incredibly useful in several other regions of science as well. Cosmetic companies make use on this term to entice potential prospects by looking into making a few sound technologically advanced. What people don't realise is nanotechnology is making waves too, within the field of biomedical science, for example locating a cure for cancer and treating illnesses via the non-invasive way.

In the article mentioned above, a number of scientists are telling us that zinc oxide in the nano form may be harmful and cause cancer. Now this could scare many people off beauty products that contain zinc oxide even though we will ask sales assistants whether these oxide particles are nano-sized, the likelihood is they wouldn't know for sure. Yet, I only say that is hardly any cause of concern. Firstly, the researchers continue to be inside the initial stages of these research. This means that any findings they've got are not substantial enough to warrant zinc oxide being labelled as carcinogenic. Secondly, if you do some research on the own, you'll realize that past scientific research have shown zinc oxide inside the nanoparticle form to get anti-tumour agents targeting cancerous cells 1,2,3. So the actual question should be: What may be the difference between your various categories of cancer-causing and cancer-targeting nanoparticles of zinc oxide?

Because the research isn't finished, experimental procedures cannot be revealed. What I'd like to know is why the scientists are announcing their current findings when the studies have not yet been completed. Here they are, telling the world that zinc oxide might be cancer-causing and could possibly be harmful. That's something such as me hinting that chocolate cake you're about to eat could be contaminated and cause diarrhoea but that more people would have to consume it for us to find out without a doubt (assuming I ate it and i also had diarrhoea but I could try to be lactose-intolerant). Perhaps they're really excited regarding their current results such as the go around telling people things you're not 100% absolutely clear on yet. Why are these oxides causing cells in cell cultures to multiply and exactly why are the oxides in Hanley's and Wang's studies doing the precise opposite? Is it the synthesis method? Delivery method? Variants fit and size in the nanoparticles? Dosage? What will be the differences within the intra- and intercellular interactions?

While nanotechnology in beauty products is often a quite interesting topic, and something will possibly write endlessly about, consumers currently have being more aware on their own part with the properties of such ingredients in addition to their capabilities where concerned. It could never be a a dangerous thing to discover out more concerning the stuff that you're donning yourself, whether oahu is the latest liquid foundation or eye cream.