OF THE
TIMES
Nanotechnology in agriculture is based on the premise that we can improve efficiency and productivity by rearranging atoms in seeds, by developing even more potent chemical inputs, by using high technology surveillance to allow electronic, rather than person-based surveillance of on-farm conditions, and by further automating inputs to plant growth. Applications of nanotechnology to food processing assume that humans can 'improve' the taste, texture, appearance, nutritional content and longevity of food by manipulating it at the atomic level. It has even been argued that this will result in food that is 'safer'.
These assumptions are based on a flawed belief that humans can remake the natural world from the atom up - and get a better result. It assumes that we can predict the consequences of our actions, even when we are dealing with highly unpredictable processes and forces - such as quantum mechanics. Unfortunately, history tells us that we are simply not very good at predicting the outcomes of complex systems - witness the disasters that resulted from the introduction of biological controls such as the Cane Toad, or the introduction of rabbits and foxes for sport. History is similarly littered with examples of huge health and environmental problems that resulted from the failure to respond to early warning signs about previous perceived "wonder" materials such as CFCs, DDT and asbestos. This suggests that we should take the early warning signs associated with the toxicity of nanoparticles very seriously.

Comment: One could argue that the media is silent on Ebola in the US to prevent panic. Another argument could be made that through controlling the flow of information on this plague, the media, under the influence of government and Big Pharma, are holding on to information now only to release it later for their own benefit.
See also: Ebola outbreak rages on despite little media coverage