Nano database

http://community.safenano.org/blogs/rob_aitken/archive/2009/05/20/326.aspx#328
Rob Aitken:Stress testing
OECD database is a very impressive and ambitious attempt to gather together information about all of the relevant nano EHS studies which have been carried out or are currently underway. Having just gone live, it is perhaps inappropriate at this time to expect too much from this database, even though it was constructed largely from the previous database from Woodrow Wilson. Having previously worked with that database as part of our EMERGNANO project, I know well the issues which have to be addressed in order to clean the data such that it may be usefully used in analysis or future studies. In addition the need to continually add to the data, and keep it up to date is also paramount. In our EMERGNANO study we took great care to dig below the entry level data available in the database in order to identify those projects which were really relevant and were making real contributions towards resolving the questions relevant to the safety of nanomaterials. My hope had been that OECD would be similarly judicious in their data cleaning activities.

I have to say that my first attempt to derive useful information from this database has not filled me with a great level of confidence. The reason I was using the database was to prepare a talk for EuroNanoforum 2009 which will be held in Prague in June of this year. I am giving a key note speech there in the EHS session and in which I intend to lay out the European landscape. I looked at the OECD database as an information source by which to find all of the projects funded under the framework (FP7) programme. From other activities within that programme (more later) I know of approximately 15 projects with a total funding of something close to 50 million Euros which are under way or about to start. I had had understood that these projects had been added to the OEACD database.

Well it may be that they are, but they are not very easy to find! A search of funding source reveals some interesting reading. First search term “EC”, one project found ENREHS (one of IOM’s). That’s good but the “country” is identified as EC although the project is lead from the UK. Hmmmm. Second term “European”, one project found, which was in fact a regional government funded French project not an EC project. Third attempt “EU”, thirteen projects found. Ah, excellent! Closer examination however shows that only five of the relevant FP7 projects were in that search including one which came up twice. The remainder of the thirteen comprised various other national or barely relevant projects.

Next term “FP7” no projects found. Help, where are the rest of the projects? Eventually after much digging I found 10 of the 15 projects, there may be more!

Undeterred I pressed on, which of my projects are in here? No rather than that, I thought I would search for Lang Tran’s projects. I found three. That might surprise those of you had been under the impression that Lang was one of the most active and widely known researchers working in this area in Europe! It is interesting. The three which were found were “Nanoparticles an occupational hygiene review” in which I was the principal investigator. Project status described as “project is underway” (the project finished in 2004) The second one “A scoping study to indentify hazard data needs for addressing the risks presented by nanoparticles and nanotubes”, principal investigator Lang Tran, status project is underway (the project finished in 2006) The third one a risk assessment for particle exposure principal investigator Tran Lang status correctly identified as project is underway although the name under which this project is better known is PARTICLE_RISK which is not apparent from the data entry. No mention then of the CELLPEN and HARN projects which Lang has led for DEFRA over the last couple of years or of the various other projects of which Lang has been a co-author including EMERGNANO and REFNANO. Nor is there any reference to the ENPRA FP7 project which has just been funded which should also appear in this list.

Its also interesting looking at some of the projects which are on the list. You can do this by selecting all projects. I’ve pull out just a few examples, one, “The tenth annual green chemistry and engineering conference: student scholarships” this entry starts 2006, ends 2007 is to support students to attend this particular conference.

A second one, “A continuous monitor for arsenic in drinking water”?

A third one, “A fundamental study of transport within a single nanoscopic channel.” This project is about quantifying mass transport through nanoporous media and while undoubtedly it is a worthy piece of science and does have some relevance its immediate application towards risk assessment management is probably some time away. Nevertheless this project is identified as having substantial relevance.

“A nanocontact sensor for heavy metal.”, I could go on

These are just a four projects selected from the first page of twenty entries in a total of six hundred and ninety one entries. It is fair to say that the relevance of some of these projects to NANO EHS is rather mixed.

This is not intended to be overly critical of what OECD have done here. On the contrary I think what they have started is something that will in due course become an excellent tool for both researchers and policymakers in this area. However until the data contained within the database can be thoroughly cleaned and validated, a process which will take some considerable time and effort, and kept up to date, then use of the data contained therein for policy making and research prioritisation must be highly suspect.