[Platform] GRP on nanotech?

[Jamie O'Keefe]

Your suggestions sound good.  You might add:

1.  health implications from very small scale particles that plants,
humans and other animals cannot process and may lead to illnesses.

2.  should a Nanotech modification get out, as say with certain genes
in crops, there exists the possibility that rather than having the
creator pay for the resulting contamination, anyone who gains use of
such nanotech could actually be sued for unauthorized use.  This has
happened recently with cross pollination between GMO and non-GMO crops
and a farmer was sued to unauthorized use.

3.  should nanotech pan out as the boon its proponents make it out to
be, there are equity issues as well as the rich gain from life
extending treatments, for example, that are too expensive for poor and
the middle class.

Also, the 2004 national party platform said:

Nonotechnology

Nanotechnology - the science of manipulating matter at the molecular
level - is poised to provide a new industrial revolution with vast
social and environmental consequences. Like nuclear science and
biotechnology, nanotechnology is being pursued largely outside of
public debate, risking great harm and abuse in its use and
application.

The Green Party calls for a halt to nanotechnology development until
the following conditions are met:

11. Development of full and open public debate about the implications
of nanotechnology and the fusion of nanotech with biological,
materials and information sciences.

12. Development of democratic public control mechanisms which would
regulate the direction of nanotechnology research and development.

13. Expanded research into the environmental and health consequences
of exposure to nano-scale materials.

14. Development of technology to contain and monitor nano-scale materials, and.

15. Development of precautionary safety measures for the containment
and control over nano-scale materials.