ABSTRACT
Some of the hype surrounding nanomedicine insists it will provide low-priced and superior equipment for medical research that will be available far and wide, nanomachines will be programmed to travel through our bloodstream to clean out fatty deposits, medical diagnosis and drug delivery will be transformed, and preventive medicine will include nanorobots that would provide a defense against invading viruses in our bodies. In short nanomedicine has proclaimed to be the solution to many, if not all, medical problems [41]. While many futurists and ethicists point to nanotechnology applications for active implants, experts believe this area of medicine will have the least impact from nanotechnology. Nanotechnology will be used only as an enabling technology for optimizing certain components, and a majority of the components will be driven by advances in microtechnology[42]. The enabling component of nanotechnology in relation to implants carries over to drug delivery and diagnostics. This enabling capability has the potential to add innovative functionality and is highly versatile. Nanomedicine is expected to enhance human capabilities and properties. This surrounds the idea that nanotechnology will enable the construction of stronger and enhanced tissues and organs and improve our mental capacity. The latter of these potential implications of nanomedicine is where a lot of the ethical debates are and will take place. However, according to Moghimi et al., 2005 [7], the future of nanomedicine will depend largely on the rational design of nanomaterials on the basis of a thorough understanding of their biological processes rather than forcing applications based on hype. 17.3.3 Public Acceptance
Godman [43] asks the question, Do we want to find criteria for risk acceptance, or do we wish to open the discussion so that the core values of technology development are called into question?Grunwald echoes this idea stating that the unique ethical issues arise from the public discourse about nanotechnology and not anything unique in the actual ethical tenants[44]. Similarly, Petersen suggests that it is more important to create a “conversation about” nanotechnology rather than creating a new field of nanoethics[45].
