ASME NanoEngineering for Medicine and Biology (NEMB), Feb. 7 - 10, 2010 —Houston DNA Damage by...

ASME NanoEngineering for Medicine and Biology (NEMB), Feb. 7 - 10 , 2010 —Houston

DNA Damage by Nanoparticles

Thomas PrevenslikQED Radiation

Berlin and Hong Kong

1


Introduction NPs offer significant technological advancements as

antibacterial agents in food processing, reducing infections in burn treatment, sunscreen skin lotions, and

treating cancer tumors.

However, NPs have a darkside

2

Over the past few decades, experiments have shown NPs produce ROS of hydroxyl radicals that cause apoptosis/cell death and single and double strand breaks in the DNA.

ROS = Reactive Oxidative Species


DNA and ROS Energies

Direct DNA require at least photolysis at UV levels. The DNA ionization potential ~ 7.5 to 10 eV. Breaking

SS and DS in dry DNA ~ above 7 eV.

Indirect ROS cause SS and DS breaks by chemical reaction ~ 5.2 eV break H-OH.

At least 5.2 eV required to produce ROS3


Oxidative Stress Paradigm

ROS are correlated with the surface area of <100 nm NPs

Problem – Coarse PM > 300 nm enhance ROS

Surface activity is the ROS mechanism.

Problem – Surface energy << 5.2 eV cannot produce ROS

4


DNA Damage by EM Radiation

Experiments over past 20 years show DNA damage by NPs that by conventional EM

radiation beyond the UV.

5

mimics


Hypothesis

NPs in body fluids produce EM radiation beyond the UV that generates the ROS

6


Proposal

QED Radiation from NPs is the source of EM radiation

QED = quantum electrodynamics

7


QED Radiation

Classically, heat (EM energy) is conserved by an increase in temperature.

But at the nanoscale, QM restricts the atom vanishing heat capacity so heat cannot be conserved by an increase in temperature.

QM = quantum mechanics

QED allows absorbed heat to be conserved at the by frequency up-conversion to the NP resonance followed by the emission of

nonthermal EM radiation

8


QED Radiation

From QM, QED creates photons of wavelength upon supplying EM energy to a QM box with walls separated by /2.

9

QM restricts the heat content of atoms depending on temperature and EM confinement given by the Einstein-

Hopf relation for harmonic oscillator

rn/c

f D2 hfEP

For a QM box comprising a spherical NP of diameter D and refractive index nr the equations may be written


Einstein-Hopf Relation

0.00001

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1 10 100 1000

Wavelength - - microns

Pla

nck

Ene

rgy

- E -

eV

1

kT

hcexp

hc

E

10NPs

0.0258 eV Heat

capacity vanishes


NPs produce QED Radiation

• • • Heat Capacity Vanishes

No Temperature change

EM

Emission

= 2Dnr

Molecular

Collisions NP

11


Purpose

Show QED radiation:

has the energy > 5.2 eV to produce ROS in the oxidative stress paradigm,

the mechanism that allows the oxidative stress paradigm to be valid even in the presence of PM,

an alternative to signaling in cell-to-cell communication of traditional biology using data from :

University of Bristol PNNL – Low Dose Radiation Laboratory

12


NPs and Biological Cells

13

Collision

DNA Damage

H2OHydroxyl Radical

NP

Biological Cell Wall

UV• UV

• NP


Collisional Power

0.1

1

10

100

1000

0 500 1000 1500 2000

NP Diameter - D - nm

Col

lisio

nal P

ower

- Q

C -

nW

avag2

C N/MWm,m

kTpPD

32Q

Collision Power

14


QED Radiation as ROS Source

15

0.1

1

10

100

1000

1 10 100 1000 10000

NP Diameter - D - nm

Pla

nck

Ene

rgy

- E P

- e

V

1.E+12

1.E+15

1.E+18

1.E+21

1.E+24

1.E+27E P

dNP /dt

QE

D P

hoto

n ra

te -

dNP /

dt.

Non-IonizeIonize

Silver nr = 1.35

CP

P Qdt

dNE Collision Power

QED radiation > 5.2 eV to produce ROS


QED Radiation Explains increase in ROS by PM

16

d

dUV

UV

NIRD

Collision

Collisions

DNA

DNA

PM increase ROS, but oxidative stress paradigm

still valid. Problem is the NPs.


DNA Damage by SignalingRecently, University of Bristol claimed signaling as the

mechanism by which damaged cells damage other cells at a distance

Nature Nanotechnology, 5 November 2009

The Bristol claim is rebutted using QED Radiation www.nanoqed.net , “DNA damage by signaling” Expanded version of this

presentation17

http://www.nanoqed.net/


Bristol Experiment

CoCr Particles

30 nm – 2.9 microns

Human Fibroblast Cells

Micro-porous Membrane 0.4 micron

BeWo Barrier

1 mm

18


Signaling Arguments

Pro: Drugs that suppress cell-to-cell communication also reduce DNA damage

Con: Cell-to-Cell communication has nothing to do with Co ions that pass through the filter and enter the fibroblast cells

QED radiation produces Co ions by corroding CoCr

Drugs are UV absorptive and reduce ROS, thereby reducing DNA damage by producing fewer Co ions.

Resolved: Upon further study19


PNNL Low Dose Program

Cells were stained with pink and blue dye. Only cells stained with pink dye were hit by alpha particles.

But blue cells are also damaged.

Traditional Biological Explanation: Pink cells signal blue cells of damage

Evidence for Signaling ?

Or Pink cell fragments produce QED radiation that damages blue cells?

PNNL – Low Dose Radiation

Research Program

20


Questions & Papers

Email: [email protected]

http://www.nanoqed.org

21

http://www.nanoqed.org/

ASME NanoEngineering for Medicine and Biology (NEMB), Feb. 7 - 10, 2010 —Houston DNA Damage by...

Documents

Transcript of ASME NanoEngineering for Medicine and Biology (NEMB), Feb. 7 - 10, 2010 —Houston DNA Damage by...