The nanotechnology revolution could turn into a PR disaster on a grand scale for the food industry unless regulatory and safety concerns were addressed, claimed a leading social scientist.
Brian Wynne, professor of science studies at Lancaster University, warned of headlines about "unregulated, unlabelled and atomically modified" nanoparticles in food unless the industry addressed labelling and legal issues.
At The Institute of Food Science and Technology's annual conference, Wynne said that it was patronising and dangerous to assume that consumer opposition to novel technologies was purely driven by ignorance.
"People are not suspicious just because they are stupid," he said. "And simply responding to concerns by talking about risk assessment is not the answer. Consumers were told that there was no risk with Thalidomide and we all know what happened there."
While nanotechnology had caught legislators on the hop, it should be possible to tweak current legislation to accommodate it "without having to rewrite the rulebook", said independent food safety expert Neville Craddock.
Despite their being already widely used in food and packaging, there was "no legal definition of nanoparticles and no legal requirement for them to be formally cleared as novel ingredients or additives or to indicate their presence on food labels," he said.
However, they could fit within existing food additives legislation, food contact materials legislation and novel food and ingredients legislation, he suggested: "There should be case-by-case approvals of nanoparticles even if macroparticles of the same compound are already food-approved."
Nanoforms of a compound like E171 (titanium dioxide) could be labelled E171n, said Craddock. "Maybe even new e-numbers could be created."