• At this time, it is not fully known whether skin penetration of nanoparticles would result in adverse effects in animal models, although topical application of raw SWCNT to
    nude mice has been shown to cause dermal irritation, and in vitro studies using primary or cultured human skin cells have shown that carbon nanotubes can enter cells and cause release of pro-inflammatory cytokines, oxidative stress, and decreased

  • [5] Nanoparticles have much larger surface area to unit mass ratios which in some cases may lead to greater pro-inflammatory effects in, for example, lung tissue.

  • Nanomaterials appear to have toxicity effects that are unusual and not seen with larger particles, and these smaller particles can pose more of a threat to the human body
    due to their ability to move with a much higher level of freedom while the body is designed to attack larger particles rather than those of the nanoscale.

  • [20] Titanium dioxide (TiO2) dust is considered a lung tumor risk, with ultrafine (nanoscale) particles having an increased mass-based potency relative to fine TiO2, through
    a secondary genotoxicity mechanism that is not specific to TiO2 but primarily related to particle size and surface area.

  • Other properties of nanomaterials that influence toxicity include: chemical composition, shape, surface structure, surface charge, aggregation and solubility,[11] and the
    presence or absence of functional groups of other chemicals.

  • Although the extent to which animal data may predict clinically significant lung effects in workers is not known, the toxicity seen in the short-term animal studies indicate
    a need for protective action for workers exposed to these nanomaterials.

  • In addition, many nanoparticles will agglomerate to some extent in the environment or in the body before they reach their target, so it is desirable to study how toxicity
    is affected by agglomeration.

  • [6] Mechanisms of toxicity Oxidative stress[edit] For some types of particles, the smaller they are, the greater their surface area to volume ratio and the higher their chemical
    reactivity and biological activity.

  • [14] Carbon-based[edit] Main article: Toxicology of carbon nanomaterials The latest toxicology studies on mice as of 2013 involving exposure to carbon nanotubes (CNT) showed
    a limited pulmonary inflammatory potential of MWCNT at levels corresponding to the average inhalable elemental carbon concentrations observed in U.S.-based CNT facilities.

  • The large number of variables influencing toxicity means that it is difficult to generalise about health risks associated with exposure to nanomaterials – each new nanomaterial
    must be assessed individually and all material properties must be taken into account.

  • In addition to questions about what happens if non-degradable or slowly degradable nanoparticles accumulate in bodily organs, another concern is their potential interaction
    or interference with biological processes inside the body.

  • Size can also affect the particles’ reactivity and the specific mechanism by which they are toxic.

  • There is a need for new methodologies to quickly assess the presence and reactivity of nanoparticles in commercial, environmental, and biological samples since current detection
    techniques require expensive and complex analytical instrumentation.

  • With the recent increase in interest and development of nanotechnology, many studies have been performed to assess whether the unique characteristics of these NPs, namely
    their large surface area to volume ratio, might negatively impact the environment upon which they were introduced.

  • In principle, a large number of particles could overload the body’s phagocytes, cells that ingest and destroy foreign matter, thereby triggering stress reactions that lead
    to inflammation and weaken the body’s defense against other pathogens.

  • [24] The properties of a nanomaterial such as size distribution and agglomeration state can change as a material is prepared and used in toxicology studies, making it important
    to measure them at different points in the experiment.

  • [21] Dermal[edit] Some studies suggest that nanomaterials could potentially enter the body through intact skin during occupational exposure.

  • [1] Because of quantum size effects and large surface area to volume ratio, nanomaterials have unique properties compared with their larger counterparts that affect their

  • Because nanotechnology is a recent development, the health and safety effects of exposures to nanomaterials, and what levels of exposure may be acceptable, is not yet fully

  • [22] Gastrointestinal[edit] Ingestion can occur from unintentional hand-to-mouth transfer of materials; this has been found to happen with traditional materials, and it is
    scientifically reasonable to assume that it also could happen during handling of nanomaterials.

  • Surface chemistry and charge[edit] NPs, in their implementation, are covered with coatings and sometimes given positive or negative charges depending upon the intended function.

  • Unfortunately, agglomeration has frequently been ignored in nanotoxicity studies, even though agglomeration would be expected to affect nanotoxicity since it changes the size,
    surface area, and sedimentation properties of the nanoparticles.

  • [6][7][8] One study considers release of airborne engineered nanoparticles at workplaces, and associated worker exposure from various production and handling activities, to
    be very probable.

  • [8] Nanomaterials can be toxic to human tissue and cell cultures (resulting in increased oxidative stress, inflammatory cytokine production and cell death) depending on their
    composition and concentration.

  • [18] The inhalation risk is affected by the dustiness of the material, the tendency of particles to become airborne in response to a stimulus.

  • ROS and free radical production is one of the primary mechanisms of nanoparticle toxicity; it may result in oxidative stress, inflammation, and consequent damage to proteins,
    membranes and DNA.

  • [18] Biodistribution The extremely small size of nanomaterials also means that they much more readily gain entry into the human body than larger sized particles.

  • The greater chemical reactivity of nanomaterials can result in increased production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), including free radicals.

  • The agglomeration/deagglomeration (mechanical stability) potentials of airborne engineered nanoparticle clusters also have significant influences on their size distribution
    profiles at the end-point of their environmental transport routes.

  • As is the case for toxicity profile with any chemical modification of a structural moiety, the authors suggest that individual molecules be assessed individually.

  • Nanotoxicological studies are intended to determine whether and to what extent these properties may pose a threat to the environment and to human beings.

  • No reports of actual adverse health effects in workers using or producing these nanomaterials were known as of 2013.

  • For example, particles of different sizes can deposit in different places in the lungs, and are cleared from the lungs at different rates.

  • [19] Animal studies indicate that carbon nanotubes and carbon nanofibers can cause pulmonary effects including inflammation, granulomas, and pulmonary fibrosis, which were
    of similar or greater potency when compared with other known fibrogenic materials such as silica, asbestos, and ultrafine carbon black.

  • Above all, these properties would have to be determined not only on the nanocomponent before its introduction in the living environment but also in the (mostly aqueous) biological

  • When diluted, the positively charged metal ions often experience an electrostatic attraction to the cell membrane of nearby cells, covering the membrane and preventing it
    from permeating the necessary fuels and wastes.


Works Cited

[‘1. Buzea, Cristina; Pacheco, Ivan I.; Robbie, Kevin (December 2007). “Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: sources and toxicity”. Biointerphases. 2 (4): MR17–71. arXiv:0801.3280. doi:10.1116/1.2815690. PMID 20419892. S2CID 35457219.
2. ^ Jump up to:a
b Orel, Valerii E.; Dasyukevich, Olga; Rykhalskyi, Oleksandr; Orel, Valerii B.; Burlaka, Anatoliy; Virko, Sergii (November 2021). “Magneto-mechanical effects of magnetite nanoparticles on Walker-256 carcinosarcoma heterogeneity, redox state and growth
modulated by an inhomogeneous stationary magnetic field”. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials. 538: 168314. Bibcode:2021JMMM..53868314O. doi:10.1016/j.jmmm.2021.168314.
3. ^ “Current Strategies for Engineering Controls in Nanomaterial Production
and Downstream Handling Processes”. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health: 1–3. November 2013. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB2014102. Retrieved 2017-03-05.
4. ^ Sukhanova, Alyona; Bozrova, Svetlana; Sokolov, Pavel; Berestovoy, Mikhail;
Karaulov, Alexander; Nabiev, Igor (2018-02-07). “Dependence of Nanoparticle Toxicity on Their Physical and Chemical Properties”. Nanoscale Research Letters. 13 (1): 44. Bibcode:2018NRL….13…44S. doi:10.1186/s11671-018-2457-x. ISSN 1556-276X. PMC
5803171. PMID 29417375.
5. ^ Mahmoudi, Morteza; Hofmann, Heinrich; Rothen-Rutishauser, Barbara; Petri-Fink, Alke (April 2012). “Assessing the in vitro and in vivo toxicity of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles”. Chemical Reviews. 112 (4):
2323–38. doi:10.1021/cr2002596. PMID 22216932.
6. ^ Jump up to:a b c Oberdörster, Günter; Maynard, Andrew; Donaldson, Ken; Castranova, Vincent; Fitzpatrick, Julie; Ausman, Kevin; Carter, Janet; Karn, Barbara; Kreyling, Wolfgang (October 2005). “Principles
for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy”. Particle and Fibre Toxicology. 2: 8. doi:10.1186/1743-8977-2-8. PMC 1260029. PMID 16209704.
7. ^ Jump up to:a b Hoet, Peter
HM; Brüske-Hohlfeld, Irene; Salata, Oleg V. (December 2004). “Nanoparticles – known and unknown health risks”. Journal of Nanobiotechnology. 2 (1): 12. doi:10.1186/1477-3155-2-12. PMC 544578. PMID 15588280.
8. ^ Jump up to:a b Oberdörster, Günter;
Oberdörster, Eva; Oberdörster, Jan (July 2005). “Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles”. Environmental Health Perspectives. 113 (7): 823–39. doi:10.1289/ehp.7339. PMC 1257642. PMID 16002369.
9. ^ Ding,
Yaobo; Kuhlbusch, Thomas A.J.; Tongeren, Martie Van; Jiménez, Araceli Sánchez; Tuinman, Ilse; Chen, Rui; Alvarez, Iñigo Larraza; Mikolajczyk, Urszula; Nickel, Carmen (January 2017). “Airborne engineered nanomaterials in the workplace-a review of release
and worker exposure during nanomaterial production and handling processes” (PDF). Journal of Hazardous Materials. 322 (Pt A): 17–28. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.04.075. PMID 27181990.
10. ^ Cassano, Domenico; Pocoví-Martínez, Salvador; Voliani, Valerio
(2018-01-17). “Ultrasmall-in-Nano Approach: Enabling the Translation of Metal Nanomaterials to Clinics”. Bioconjugate Chemistry. 29 (1): 4–16. doi:10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.7b00664. ISSN 1043-1802. PMID 29186662.
11. ^ Jump up to:a b Nel, Andre; Xia,
Tian; Mädler, Lutz; Li, Ning (February 2006). “Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel”. Science. 311 (5761): 622–7. Bibcode:2006Sci…311..622N. doi:10.1126/science.1114397. PMID 16456071. S2CID 6900874.
12. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Seabra
AB, Durán N (June 2015). “Nanotoxicology of Metal Oxide Nanoparticles”. Metals. 5 (2): 934–975. doi:10.3390/met5020934.
13. ^ Schrand, Amanda M.; Rahman, Mohammad F.; Hussain, Saber M.; Schlager, John J.; Smith, David A.; Syed, Ali F. (2010-09-01).
“Metal-based nanoparticles and their toxicity assessment”. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology. 2 (5): 544–568. doi:10.1002/wnan.103. ISSN 1939-0041. PMID 20681021.
14. ^ Cassano, Domenico; Santi, Melissa; Cappello,
Valentina; Luin, Stefano; Signore, Giovanni; Voliani, Valerio (November 2016). “Biodegradable Passion Fruit-Like Nano-Architectures as Carriers for Cisplatin Prodrug”. Particle & Particle Systems Characterization. 33 (11): 818–824. doi:10.1002/ppsc.201600175.
S2CID 99268672.
15. ^ Erdely A, Dahm M, Chen BT, Zeidler-Erdely PC, Fernback JE, Birch ME, et al. (October 2013). “Carbon nanotube dosimetry: from workplace exposure assessment to inhalation toxicology”. Particle and Fibre Toxicology. 10 (1): 53.
doi:10.1186/1743-8977-10-53. PMC 4015290. PMID 24144386.
16. ^ Chan, Warren C. W., ed. (2007). Bio-applications of nanoparticles. Springer. ISBN 978-0387767123. OCLC 451336793.
17. ^ Jump up to:a b Powers, Kevin W.; Palazuelos, Maria; Moudgil,
Brij M.; Roberts, Stephen M. (2007-01-01). “Characterization of the size, shape, and state of dispersion of nanoparticles for toxicological studies”. Nanotoxicology. 1 (1): 42–51. doi:10.1080/17435390701314902. ISSN 1743-5390. S2CID 137174566.
18. ^
Jump up to:a b c “Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology: Managing the Health and Safety Concerns Associated with Engineered Nanomaterials”. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health: 11–12. March 2009. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB2009125. Retrieved
19. ^ “General Safe Practices for Working with Engineered Nanomaterials in Research Laboratories”. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health: 5–6. May 2012. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB2012147. Retrieved 2017-03-05.
20. ^
Jump up to:a b “Current Intelligence Bulletin 65: Occupational Exposure to Carbon Nanotubes and Nanofibers”. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health: v–ix, 33–35, 63–64. April 2013. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB2013145. Retrieved 2017-04-26.
21. ^
“Current Intelligence Bulletin 63: Occupational Exposure to Titanium Dioxide”. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health: v–vii, 73–78. April 2011. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB2011160. Retrieved 2017-04-27.
22. ^ “Radiation Safety Aspects
of Nanotechnology”. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 2017-03-02. pp. 88–90. Archived from the original on 2017-10-31. Retrieved 2017-07-07.
23. ^ Holsapple, Michael P.; Farland, William H.; Landry, Timothy D.; Monteiro-Riviere,
Nancy A.; Carter, Janet M.; Walker, Nigel J.; Thomas, Karluss V. (November 2005). “Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials, part II: toxicological and safety evaluation of nanomaterials, current challenges and data needs”. Toxicological
Sciences. 88 (1): 12–7. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfi293. PMID 16120754.
24. ^ Powers, Kevin W.; Brown, Scott C.; Krishna, Vijay B.; Wasdo, Scott C.; Moudgil, Brij M.; Roberts, Stephen M. (2006-04-01). “Research Strategies for Safety Evaluation of Nanomaterials.
Part VI. Characterization of Nanoscale Particles for Toxicological Evaluation”. Toxicological Sciences. 90 (2): 296–303. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfj099. ISSN 1096-6080. PMID 16407094.
25. ^ “An Issues Landscape for Nanotechnology Standards. Report of
a Workshop” (PDF). Institute for Food and Agricultural Standards, Michigan State University, East Lansing. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-05-11.
26. ^ Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering (2004). “Nanoscience and nanotechnologies:
opportunities and uncertainties”. Archived from the original on 2011-05-26. Retrieved 2008-05-18.
27. ^ “Nanotechnology”. ETC Group. Retrieved 2018-01-05.
Photo credit:’]