Eight environmental groups have gotten together to ask the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban sunscreens containing nanoparticles. The groups argue that the small scale of the titanium dioxide and zinc oxide particles makes their health effects unclear.

The groups, including Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, held a conference call with reporters, and the story was picked up by the Associated Press.

"These companies are literally treating their customers like guinea pigs," said Lisa Archer, a senior campaigner for Friends of the Earth. Archer invoked asbestos, DDT and PCBs as examples of other substances where regulatory action came too late to prevent the health and environmental damage that ensued from their use.

Sunscreen is a particularly sensitive topic because it's absorbed by the skin. But did these groups consider that one of the most common uses of nanotechnology is in wound dressings? Obviously, that would be one application that would introduce nanoparticles into the bloodstream much more rapidly than sunscreen. Nanoparticles also appear in food containers.

But these groups chose to focus on sunscreen, probably because everyone uses it, and the predictable invocation of asbestos was probably intended to cause fear.

Caution is appropriate, but fearmongering is not helpful. Do these groups have any evidence of harm done by even one of the billions of applications of nanoparticle-containing sunscreen? Meanwhile, the link between sun exposure and skin cancer is very well established, and what if their alarmism prompts people to stop using sunscreen?

The FDA does have a policy on nanotechnology, and there's much debate on what their role in regulating nanotechnology should be.

Sunscreens are already subjected to regulation, and if you feel strongly about this issue you can ask to participate in their Nanotechnology Public Meeting this fall. You can also leave a comment here, and see the interesting forum on the subject at RedState.com.