How does the NCL determine if an engineered nanoparticle is likely to be safe?
In short, the NCL examines the weight of the evidence from preclinical studies, looking for “consensus behavior”. A recently published study1 demonstrated interference of carbon nanotubes with the MTT assay (see “NCL Protocols” in this issue of NCL News for a discussion of the MTT assay). The study showed that carbon nanotubes have the ability to absorb formazan dye, giving the appearance of a reduction in cell viability. This phenomenon helped to explain the lack of consensus behavior of carbon nanotubes in the in vitro toxicology literature where groups were using different cytotoxicity endpoints and arriving at contrasting conclusions regarding carbon nanotube cytotoxicity. Even if the previous toxic responses attributed to carbon nanotubes in vitro were the result of MTT assay interference, this does not mean that carbon nanotubes are necessarily safe, as often in vitro results are not predictive of in vivo responses due to the complexities inherent in the whole organisms (i.e. exp
Related Questions
- How is DOL going to determine if it is "at least as likely as not" that exposure to a toxic substance was a significant factor in the development of a covered illness?
- Is the tap water from local municipalities safe? Is it likely that older copper pipes may leach into the water?
- How does the NCL determine if an engineered nanoparticle is likely to be safe?
