Nano-hydroxyapatite Before the Science Court

Author:

Klaessig Frederick C.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn October 2015, the European Union’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety issued a Preliminary Opinion on Hydroxyapatite (nano). Past industrial experience with this material and participation in ISO/TC-229, Nanotechnologies, led me to submit comments on the Committee’s interpretations of physico-chemical properties, especially solubility, that in retrospect were also probing of the Committee’s collective understanding of nanomaterials. The Committee’s responses are examined against a background of other Opinions issued in the same time period. The expert’s role and responsibility, whether as an individual or a group member or in representing a scientific discipline, are examined through the concept of epistemic community taken from the public policy literature. A central theme is the Committee’s framing of chemical narratives such that its administrative procedures are projected onto the nanomaterial safety literature that is itself undergoing considerable investigation and revision. Inherent to this analysis is the singular role of toxicologists in the regulatory process. A related exchange by Australian and New Zealand colleagues is examined for its parallels to the SCCS actions, and there is a cursory discussion of later SCCS Opinions regarding Hydroxyapatite (nano).

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Management of Technology and Innovation,History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy,Sociology and Political Science,Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Reference87 articles.

1. SCCS (2016) Opinion on hydroxyapatite (nano). Revision of 16 March 2016, SCCS/1566/15. https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_safety/docs/sccs_o_191.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2023

2. SCCS (2016) Rules of procedure. The Scientific Committees on Consumer Safety (SCCS) and Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) April 2016. https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/docs/rules_procedure_2016_en.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2023

3. Jasanoff S (1990) The fifth branch: Science advisers as policy makers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

4. Collins HM, Evans R (2002) The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Soc Stud Sci 32:235–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312702032002003

5. Haas PM (1992) Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. Int Organ 46(1):1–35. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706951

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3