Robert Bradbury has some good news and some bad news about the National Institutes of Health nanomedicine roadmap initiative shindig this week:
- The good news... The NIH really seems to understand that to make progress in nanotech one must integrate researchers from various areas of expertise. The bad news... Few if any people attending the conference have read any of the background literature on what nanotechnology or nanomedicine really involve. When I mentioned preg_replace('/<\/?p( [^>]*)?>[
]*/', '
', preg_replace('/
[ ]*/', ' ', ''))
or preg_replace('/<\/?p( [^>]*)?>[ ]*/', ' ', preg_replace('/
[ ]*/', ' ', ''))
or preg_replace('/<\/?p( [^>]*)?>[ ]*/', ' ', preg_replace('/
[ ]*/', ' ', ''))
, during the interactive periods they generally were unrecognized. This seems to be consistent with the Drexler v. Smalley debate which suggests that most scientists simply have not done their homework (in terms of learning about nanotechnology). More here
Related Posts
Nanobots: Body and antibody
Do no harm: Don't forget Freitas
For greener planet, remove people; results may vary
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments