As Nanotech's Promise Grows, Will Puny Particles Present Big Health Problems? - Scientific American, USA

It is clear that inhaled nanoparticles can make their way into the bloodstream and throughout the body. Can they also penetrate the skin? What happens when they are ingested? Nobody knows. The size and shape of the particle are critical variables. And what about the amount? Nobody knows.

Also, which companies are using nanomaterials, especially in sprays or powders that can easily be inhaled? How many workers might be affected? Nobody knows.
The reason: nanomaterials are completely unregulated; industry is under no obligation to keep records on potential hazards or anything else.

Nanotechnology's health, environmental impacts worry scientists and the public - NanoWerk, USA
Nanotechnology is only now starting to emerge on the nation’s policy agenda. Amplifying the problem is that the news media have not paid much attention to nanotechnology and its implications.
Of the three groups that the public trusts most -- university scientists, consumer organizations and regulators – the only group that more than half the public trusts are university scientists. “This is a policy relevant finding,” she added, “because, on average, university nanotech scientists have been hesitant to engage the public in this sort of discourse.”

Professor spreads facts about nanotechnology - The Brown & White, USA
Public knowledge about nanotechnology and its unforeseen risks is limited but growing, said Sharon Friedman, director of the Science and Environmental writing program and associate dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.
Scientists have yet to fully determine the affects of nanotechnology and have not communicated with society about the possibilities, Friedman said.

Codes of conduct, and the hare and tortoise of sustainable nanotechnology development - Andrew Maynard for SafeNano, UK
I’m sure that comparing nanotechnology in the US and Europe to the mythical race between the hare and tortoise is deeply flawed on many levels. But bear with me on this one… The US clearly sees business innovation as the key to reaping the rewards of nanotechnology, and the regulatory principles are designed primarily to protect innovation (while avoiding unnecessary harm to people and the environment). Europe, on the other hand, stresses the social impact of nanotechnologies in the decision-making process.
Which will win—the hare or the tortoise? Well, I’m not a betting man. But if I were, I would keep a lookout for some metaphorical snoozing this side of the Atlantic.

Religion colors Americans' views of nanotechnology - University of Madison-Wisconsin, USA
Is nanotechnology morally acceptable? For a significant percentage of Americans, the answer is no, according to a recent survey of Americans' attitudes about the science of the very small. In a sample of 1,015 adult Americans, only 29.5 percent of respondents agreed that nanotechnology was morally acceptable. In European surveys that posed identical questions about nanotechnology to people in the United Kingdom and continental Europe, significantly higher percentages of people accepted the moral validity of the technology. "The United States is a country where religion plays an important role in peoples' lives. European countries have a much more secular perspective."