Defining Nano,Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine: Why Should It Matter?

Nanotechnology, which involves manipulation of matter on a ‘nano’ scale, is considered to be a key enabling technology. Medical applications of nanotechnology (commonly known as nanomedicine) are expected to significantly improve disease diagnostic and therapeutic modalities and subsequently reduce health care costs. However, there is no consensus on the definition of nanotechnology or nanomedicine, and this stems from the underlying debate on defining ‘nano’. This paper aims to present the diversity in the definition of nanomedicine and its impact on the translation of basic science research in nanotechnology into clinical applications. We present the insights obtained from exploratory qualitative interviews with 46 stakeholders involved in translational nanomedicine from Europe and North America. The definition of nanomedicine has implications for many aspects of translational research including: fund allocation, patents, drug regulatory review processes and approvals, ethical review processes, clinical trials and public acceptance. Given the interdisciplinary nature of the field and common interest in developing effective clinical applications, it is important to have honest and transparent communication about nanomedicine, its benefits and potential harm. A clear and consistent definition of nanomedicine would significantly facilitate trust among various stakeholders including the general public while minimizing the risk of miscommunication and undue fear of nanotechnology and nanomedicine.     

Exploring Adolescents’ Talk About Bullying on an Online Message Board: Broadening and Complicating Understandings of Victimization

Current definitions of bullying, crafted by policymakers and researchers, raise questions about the ways in which adult constructions of bullying reflect, or fail to reflect, the lived realities of adolescents. In particular, the narrow scope of “bullying,” as currently defined, may over-simplify adolescents’ experiences with relational aggression, which often sit in the space between bullying, discrimination, and harassment. This study investigates adolescents’ talk about bullying on an online message board, as one effort to better understand whether adolescents’ constructions of bullying are aligned with those of researchers and policymakers, and where these youth constructions may overlap with ideas about discrimination and harassment. Conducting a content analysis of data from an online, teen message board, we find that participants frequently use the term bullying to describe adult or familial aggression, and often describe bullying behaviors in ways that reflect elements of discrimination and harassment. We conclude with suggestions for future research and practical approaches that might better bridge gaps between research and practice.     

Obstacles to Widening Biosample Research

Science and Engineering Ethics - Switzerland has an excellent culture of medical research and is a melting pot for medical experts with international expertise. Nevertheless, as in other countries,...     

Correction to: Synthetic Biology and the Translational Imperative

Science and Engineering Ethics - The author group of above-mentioned review paper was incorrectly published in the online article.     

SEXIST DISCRIMINATION AS DISTANCING BEHAVIOR: I. A LABORATORY DEMONSTRATION

Attitudes toward and beliefs about women have been studied but investigations of behavior directed toward women in simple interpersonal situations have been relatively infrequent, in this study, ten previously unacquainted pairs of men, ten pairs of women, and twenty mixed–gender pairs were observed during a 10-minute task in which each pair constructed a domino structure for a contest. Under these laboratory conditions in which sexual arousal and nurturance cues were minimal it was predicted that men would behave differently toward women partners than toward men partners by manifesting avoidance or distancing behavior more frequently, but that women's responses to other–gender and same–gender partners would not be reliably different. Dependent measures were obtained by self–report and by ratings of observers who watched the dyadic interaction behind a one–way vision screen. As predicted, women in mixed–gender pairs did not differ significantly from those in same–gender pairs on any measure, but men were found to distance themselves from a woman partner (as compared to a man) by turning their faces or bodies away and making negative comments, by not following advice, and by placing dominoes closer to themselves.     

The coordination of compensatory tracking and anticipatory timing tasks

Two experiments investigated the presence of a coordination factor in a task consisting of compensatory tracking and anticipatory timing components. The task (Intercept task) resembles a computer game in which a rocket must be aimed and fired to shoot an incoming missile. The studies were designed to determine if a coordinating ability exists above and beyond the abilities needed to perform the component tasks alone. We also investigated the nature of coordination abilities through correlations with other types of coordination tasks and measures of intelligence. Is coordination a general cognitive ability that contributes to performance in a wide range of coordination tasks, or is coordination ability task specific? Multiple regression analyses indicated the existence of a coordination ability in the Intercept task. This coordination ability, however, was shown to be unrelated to the coordination of visual and linguistic processing and to psychometric measures of intelligence as assessed by the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). Coordination of visual and linguistic processing correlated with a component of the ASVAB measuring perceptual speed. We conclude that, although the ability to integrate separate components of a complex task draws on a coordination ability, this ability is domain specific and thus varies depending on the nature of the component tasks.     

The role of the study section in the NIH peer review system

This paper describes the NIH grants review system, which is designed to evaluate a grant proposal for both technical merit and programmatic interest. In particular, it discusses the initial review for scientific and technical merit, using as example the Computer Study Section, which reviews applications in computer science, physiological modeling, and statistics. Criteria for evaluation include: knowledge of the state of the field, relevance to scientific innovation, commitment by the investigator, strength of association between theoretician and practitioner, methodology, human factors, and experience.