“…A compound exhibiting only one of these responses has to be considered to be equivocal. In more recent publications, the classification as potential mutagen was based on statistical significant increase in the number of mutant colonies (Miller et al , 2007; Stearns et al , 2002; Zettner et al , 2007).…”
Long carbon nanotubes (CNTs) resemble asbestos fibers due to their high length to diameter ratio and they thus have genotoxic effects. Another parameter that might explain their genotoxic effects is contamination with heavy metal ions. On the other hand, short (1-2 µm) CNTs do not resemble asbestos fibers, and, once purified from contaminations, they might be suitable for medical applications. To identify the role of fiber thickness and surface properties on genotoxicity, well-characterized short pristine and carboxylated single-walled (SCNTs) and multi-walled (MCNTs) CNTs of different diameters were studied for cytotoxicity, the cell's response to oxidative stress (immunoreactivity against hemoxygenase 1 and glutathione levels), and in a hypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyltransferase (HPRT) assay using V79 chinese hamster fibroblasts and human lung adenocarcinoma A549 cells. DNA repair was demonstrated by measuring immunoreactivity against activated histone H2AX protein. The number of micronuclei as well as the number of multinucleated cells was determined. CNTs acted more cytotoxic in V79 than in A549 cells. Plain and carboxylated thin (<8 nm) SCNTs and MCNTs showed greater cytotoxic potential and carboxylated CNTs showed indication for generating oxidative stress. Multi-walled CNTs did not cause HPRT mutation, micronucleus formation, DNA damage, interference with cell division, and oxidative stress. Carboxylated, but not plain, SCNTs showed indication for in vitro DNA damage according to increase of H2AX-immunoreactive cells and HPRT mutation. Although short CNTs presented a low in vitro genotoxicity, functionalization of short SCNTs can render these particles genotoxic.
“…A compound exhibiting only one of these responses has to be considered to be equivocal. In more recent publications, the classification as potential mutagen was based on statistical significant increase in the number of mutant colonies (Miller et al , 2007; Stearns et al , 2002; Zettner et al , 2007).…”
Long carbon nanotubes (CNTs) resemble asbestos fibers due to their high length to diameter ratio and they thus have genotoxic effects. Another parameter that might explain their genotoxic effects is contamination with heavy metal ions. On the other hand, short (1-2 µm) CNTs do not resemble asbestos fibers, and, once purified from contaminations, they might be suitable for medical applications. To identify the role of fiber thickness and surface properties on genotoxicity, well-characterized short pristine and carboxylated single-walled (SCNTs) and multi-walled (MCNTs) CNTs of different diameters were studied for cytotoxicity, the cell's response to oxidative stress (immunoreactivity against hemoxygenase 1 and glutathione levels), and in a hypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyltransferase (HPRT) assay using V79 chinese hamster fibroblasts and human lung adenocarcinoma A549 cells. DNA repair was demonstrated by measuring immunoreactivity against activated histone H2AX protein. The number of micronuclei as well as the number of multinucleated cells was determined. CNTs acted more cytotoxic in V79 than in A549 cells. Plain and carboxylated thin (<8 nm) SCNTs and MCNTs showed greater cytotoxic potential and carboxylated CNTs showed indication for generating oxidative stress. Multi-walled CNTs did not cause HPRT mutation, micronucleus formation, DNA damage, interference with cell division, and oxidative stress. Carboxylated, but not plain, SCNTs showed indication for in vitro DNA damage according to increase of H2AX-immunoreactive cells and HPRT mutation. Although short CNTs presented a low in vitro genotoxicity, functionalization of short SCNTs can render these particles genotoxic.
“…When this 570 ppb value was converted to molarity via the 1092.35 g/mol molecular weight of chelated uranium, the sensitivity is 0.52 µM. To better frame this concentration, we converted the 5.7×10 −8 g mass value to activity (assuming pure U 238 ) using the 3.36×10 −7 Ci/g U 238 specific activity 38 . The value of 19 fCi is well below the detection limits of gamma cameras and is even lower than background radiation.…”
Chemical tools that can report radioactive isotopes would be of interest to the defense community. Here we report ~250 nm polymeric nanoparticles containing porphyrinoid macrocycles with and without pre-complexed depleted uranium and demonstrate that the latter species may be detected easily and with high sensitivity via photoacoustic imaging. The porphyrinoid macrocycles used in the present study are non-aromatic in the absence of the uranyl cation, but aromatic after cation complexation. We solubilized both the freebase and metalated forms of the macrocycles in poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) and found a peak in photoacoustic signal at 910 nm excitation in the case of the uranyl complex. The signal was stable for at least 15 minutes and allowed detection of uranium concentrations down to 6.2 ppb (5.7 nM) in vitro and 0.57 ppm (19 fCi; 0.52 μM) in vivo. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of a nanoparticle that detects an actinide cation via photoacoustic imaging.
“…Such toxic effects have become so well accepted within animal and in vitro research that they are generally treated as proven facts rather than postulates. Perhaps the most important such work has been carried out by Alexandra C. Miller and her research group at the Armed Forces Radiological Research Institute (Miller et al., 2003; Miller et al., 2005; Miller et al., 2007). While the effect of this research has been to strongly support DU's critics, its ostensible aim is to find and develop countermeasures and procedures for greater protection of military personnel (e.g., Miller et al., 2005).…”
Section: The Public Science Of Depleted Uraniummentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A highly contentious debate on low‐level radiation, given renewed vigor by a recent National Research Council (2006) report, 11 holds open the possibility that even the low level of radiation emitted by DU cannot be safely ignored. Synergistic damage by chemical and radiological means has sparked renewed interest (Miller et al., 2007) and recent work on the “bystander effect”—a poorly understood process by which radiation‐damaged cells induce similar effects in surrounding cells—has suggested that alpha radiation may be even more damaging than previously suspected (Bonner, 2003). This point has not been lost on DU critics such as Keith Baverstock (Baverstock, 2005; Baverstock, Mothersill, & Thorne, 2001).…”
Section: The Public Science Of Depleted Uraniummentioning
The public controversy over depleted uranium (DU) seems to follow a standard trajectory-scientific closure, via the reduction of scientific uncertainty, led directly to policy closure, as government bureaucracies increasingly downplayed its dangers and denied redress to exposed individuals. Closer inspection, however, reveals a more complex dynamic. A series of expert, public science reports, while articulating a shared narrative of DU safety, actually accentuated great uncertainty concerning DU's biological effects, mirroring new uncertainties raised by ongoing scientific research. Policy closure is thus mirrored in neither the scholarly scientific literature nor in broader political realms, suggesting a close and unique relation between the expert reports and governmental policy making. Public science institutions and the expert reports they produce are crucial political resources for resolving governmental policy making but are decidedly less successful at closing the broader political debate. Copyright 2008 by The Policy Studies Organization.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.