The BfR Kleinman "Magic Nano" and CASCADE EFFECTS

On March 31, 2006, Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) issued a press release on “nano-sealing sprays” (http://www.bfr.bund.de/cms5w/sixcms/detail.php/7699) identified in the Washington Post article as a bathroom cleanser. In this instance, it is important to contextualize the BfR press release and ICON plans to feature such a service on its web site in the near future. In the interim, it is important to note the following:

First, there may be merely an incidental relationship between the name of a product and its use of nanomaterials. Sometimes a product’s name is hype. Simply put, it is unclear what nanoparticles, if any, are in “Magic Nano.” Products of this type often include silicates, silicones, acids and dimethyl ether as the propellent.

Second, the release is short on causal data; however, the suggestion of some correlation between the observed health effects and the aerosol version of “Magic Nano” does support the importance of learning more about the potential implications and interactions of dispersive nanomaterials and the state of the regulatory regime over nanomaterials.

Third, without additional information, we cannot determine how important this incident is in the overall scheme of nanoparticle safety, especially since the strongest relationship seems to be associated with the propellant rather than the product itself, as shown by the failure of distress incidences in the pump version.

Fourth, there may be some synergistic effect between the propellant and the particles that needs to be examined, which further supports the position taken by ICON and others in favor of the commitment of more resources to study the toxicology of nanomaterials.

Fifth, the distributors are taking a responsible and conservative approach by recalling the product immediately, even though the BfR only advises against the use of the propellant version in enclosed spaces. Current thinking is that the symptoms were caused by the propellent, but this is yet to be confirmed.

Most importantly, the call at the end of the BfR release for consumer complaints regarding other products (which may or may not use nanoparticles) could stimulate a “response cascade” whereby a problem in one product line transfers to a different product line. This has been a concern expressed by many parties in the regulatory debate. There are now over 100 adverse reports to the poison control centers, with more coming in every day as awareness increases via the media, possibly demonstrating some cascading.

On April 7 the BfR will meet with the manufacturer, Kleinman; the supplier, Nanopool; and a variety of staffers from the BfR to get answers regarding what testing was done, what risks were uncovered, and what Kleinman and or Nanopool intend to do. Depending on the discussions, the BfR will make recommendations about regulatory action.