<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="6.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Priest, Susanna Hornig</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Risk Communication for Nanobiotechnology: To Whom, About What, and Why?</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Journal of Law, Medicine &amp; Ethics</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Public Perception</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Risk Assessment</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2009</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">37</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">759 - 769</style></pages><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Regulatory oversight and public communication are intimately intertwined. Oversight failures quickly galvanize media and public attention. In addition, regulations sometimes require that risks and uncertainties be included in communication efforts aimed at non-experts outside of the regulatory and policy communities — whether in obtaining informed consent for novel medical treatments; by including risk information on drug labels, in drug advertisements, or on chemicals used in the workplace; in providing nutritional information on food packages; or by opening environmental impact assessments to public comment. This article discusses  six models of upstream public risk communication  and uses those models to analyze the communication challenges facing nanotechnology and nanobiotechnology.  The author also reviews the communication dynamics associated with the historical cases of technology regulation including genetically engineered organisms [GEOs] in the food supply, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, chemicals in the workplace, and gene transfer research or “gene therapy” to  help shed light on the communications challenges facing nanobiotechnology.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></issue></record></records></xml>