EPA Awards $2M to Study Impacts of Nanoparticles on the Brain; Ceria Nanoparticles in Diesel Fuel Additive as Model
21 August 2008
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $2 million grant to the University of Kentucky (UK) to investigate how the sizes and shapes of nanoparticles affect their ability to enter the brain. This is the largest EPA Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grant ever awarded to the University of Kentucky as well as the largest single grant ever awarded by EPA STAR for nanotechnology research.
The research team, led by Dr. Robert Yokel, will study the potential health impacts of nano-sized cerium oxide (CeO2), a diesel fuel additive. Used presently in Europe (e.g., Oxonica ENVIROX), it is claimed to improve fuel efficiency, suppress soot from exhaust, and reduce the concentration of other ultra-fine particles in the air that have known health effects. The research project will be funded for four years.
The long-term objectives of the project are to determine the physico-chemical properties of engineered nanomaterials (ENM) that influence their distribution into the cells comprising the blood-brain barrier and the brain and to characterize their beneficial and/or hazardous effects on the brain. Cerium oxide will serve as a model insoluble, stable metal oxide tracer.
Specifically, the project will test the following four null hypotheses:
That the size (~ 10, 30 and 100 nm diameter spherical CeO2 ENMs) and shape (~ 30 nm spherical, disk and rod) CeO2 ENMs do not influence their distribution into, or effects on, the rat brain.
That the surface properties (hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity, surface charge, and steric inhibition) do not influence ENM distribution into, or effects on, the rat brain. The functionalized CeO2 ENMs to be given to rats will be based on an extensive in vitro comparison of the physico-chemical properties of silanes and polymers bound to the surface of CeO2 ENMs.
That the surface properties of ENMs do not affect their protein opsonization and that the opsonizing protein nature does not influence ENM distribution into, or effects on, the rat brain.
That, over time, there are no changes in the physico-chemical properties of ENMs after they enter the brain and that there is unaltered biopersistence.
Additionally, the work will determine the rate and mechanism(s) of brain uptake of ENMs that have the greatest potential for toxicity to the BBB (blood-brain barrier) and the brain and the target cells of the BBB and brain for ENM-induced toxicity; and the mechanism(s) mediating the toxicity.
The expected results will indicate the influence of the size, shape and various surface chemistry properties of ENMs on their entrance into BBB cells and the brain, compared to selected peripheral organs, the effects they produce in the brain, their biopersistence and biotransformation in the brain.
The results should also define the rate of brain entry of those ENMs that most rapidly enter the brain and the cells most susceptible to adverse effects of ENMs.
The EPA notes that as nanotechnology progresses from research and development to commercialization and use, it is likely that manufactured nanomaterials will be released into the environment. This research is intended to provide relevant information needed for risk assessments that can inform decision-making related to nanotechnology products.
Resources
Safety/Toxicity Assessment of Ceria (A Model Engineered NP) to the Brain (EPA Grant Number: R833772)
EPAâs draft Nanotechnology Research Strategy
They should keep this study under wraps - there are a lot of rural white kids that'll be huffing this stuff like paint if they find out they can a buzz off of it!
Posted by: ejj | 21 August 2008 at 05:07 PM
ejj:
Isn't dreadful and saddening to realize that most of us are ready to support research on how to go 2 more mpg with our oversize gas guzzlers but so few are willing to support reaseach on how to prevent upcoming industrial diseases.
Should we have a second look at our values?
Posted by: HarveyD | 22 August 2008 at 07:22 AM
@ HarveyD:
Great point....but I think so much of that kind of research has already been done by the EPA and others that its hard for people to get excited about more of it. In an age of oil wars, record oil company profits, $4+ per gallon of gas, 700 billion dollars being sent overseas every year for oil, and our troops being blown up on a regular basis in third world hell-holes that will never adopt American values - research into alternatives and efficiency will always get more attention.
Posted by: ejj | 22 August 2008 at 07:51 AM
ejj:
If one looks at USA's total increasing health care cost, I wonder what really cost the most?
Pollution (from all sources) can; reduce productivity, damage assets and create huge increases in health care cost.
By putting an end to foddil fuels usage, we could win both ways.
Posted by: HarveyD | 22 August 2008 at 12:56 PM