Re: Nanoparticles: Do they belong in natural products?

(Spelling Corrected)

The body operates at the molecular level, which is even smaller than the "nano" level.

People should distinguish between "soft" and "hard" nanoparticles. Nutrient products that deliver "soft" nano-sized particles to the microvilli disintegrate as they deliver their load of a few molecules of nutrients. "Hard" nanoparticles can be absorbed through the skin or lungs and do not disintegrate.

If you open a capsule that contains a "soft" nanoparticle, the contains do not remain nano-sized but aggregate to conventional fluids and pastes. Soft nanoparticles do not persist in the environment, nor do they exist within the body outside of the GI tract.

Dramatic improvements in health can be achieved with the improved absorption of nutrient molecules delivered by "soft" nano-sized particles.

Re: Nanoparticles: Do they belong in natural products?

I think this issue needs to be approached very carefully, and only with research to insure safety. If nano particles of basic nutritional components can increase absorption multi-fold, is that a good thing? It can actually cause potential harm, and/or can cause issues with labeling and claims that could reduce consumer acceptance.

For example, we know that the daily recommendation for Calcium is 1,000 mg, in part due to the low absorption rate of calcium in the body. We can use more bio-available alternate forms of calcium that may provide the same level of absorption, but the percent RDA on the label would be less than 100%, reducing consumer interest and acceptance. The labeling laws show the calcium delivered, not the calcium absorbed.

If nano particles of calcium carbonate could deliver four times the absorption, would you use one-fourth as much calcium with only a 25% RDA label declaration, or put in the 1,000 mg and get four times the absorption, with potential issues with kidney stones, cardiovascular issues and isotonic mineral imbalances?

In most cases, all we know is that nano particles create “more” absorption, with little information on the increase by material. Does more absorption out of the gut create more absorption into cells? Does it just increase serum levels? Is it absorbed in the same form? We shouldn’t let the simple “More is Better” mantra lead us off into potential bad press from negative reactions. Determine whether the nano effect is appropriate for each nutritional component before proceeding. Claims for “greater absorption” would need strong scientific support to be accepted by consumers and regulatory agencies.

Re: Nanoparticles: Do they belong in natural products?

Any ingredient used in an on people, everything should be tested. Nano zinc oxide (nZnO) has proven to be safe so far based on 400 peer-to-peer studies testing for particle penetration. Other nanoparticles found in most cosmetics have not been tested or acknowledged as having nano properties.

In the world of quantum mechanics, what we now believe is that it is not necessarily the size, but the shape of a particle that is important. Smooth particles and substances tend not to be mechanically invasive to cells or the body, whereas those that are cork-screw or jagged shaped like asbestos are proving to be dangerous. The critical message is testing.

The jargon of the industry should also be scrutinized. Micronized describes nano in some countries and by itself is meaningless because it does not quantify the particle size. There are at least two manufacturers that agglomerate nano particles and then measure them claiming micron size. Some claim that particles over 100 nanometers are safe, but without testing. Marketing or science?

Testing for particle size is also suspect to be convenient and should not be done at agglomerated stages of production, but in the finished product and with acceptable instruments. We have photographed using a TEM a number of brands of sunscreen claiming to be “no nano,” only to find mass amounts of nano particles present. I recently wrote an article on our blog about the subject. keys-soap.com/keysblog/?p=359

There is a great deal of work using nano particles and micelle compounds to deliver nano-pharmacology to “hot cells.” Dr. Mauro Ferrari at the University of Texas School of NanoMedicine is one of the leaders and pioneers. Early work focused on carbon nano-tubes using radio frequency to release nano-pharmacology in the region of “hot cells.” Now, the focus is on attaching nano-pharmacology to nano particles that seek to attach themselves as carriers to hot cells through a quantum effect called self-assembly. The technology is called NanoVector. (zz.gd/cfb988)

So, let’s dig even smaller into the world of quantum dots that are soon to be found in sunblocks. Safe or not? They have to be tested like everything else!