Nanotech Products on the Market May Have Unknown Health and Safety Risks

By Eliza Strickland | December 11, 2008 8:59 am

nano creamFederal research on the emerging field of nanotechnology has failed to adequately address health, safety, and environmental concerns, according to a critical new report from the National Research Council. With more than 600 products that use nanotech materials already on the market, the lag in research creates a risk to consumers, and could also fuel a “nanophobia” in which people assume that every product that uses the new technology is harmful. David Rejeski, director of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies … said the report echoed calls by industry and congressional leaders for a revamped research plan for nanotechnology. “The administration’s delay has hurt investor and consumer confidence,” Rejeski said in a statement. “It has gambled with public health and safety” [Reuters].

Nanomaterials are engineered on the scale of a billionth of a meter, perhaps 1/10,000 the width of a human hair. They are turning up in a range of items including consumer products like toothpaste and tennis rackets and industrial products like degreasers or adhesives [The New York Times]. Engineered nanoparticles can also be found in sunscreens, cosmetics, and the fabric used in “nano-pants” that resist stains.

But research on the potential hazards posed by nanomaterials hasn’t kept up with the market, the report argues. Concerns have been raised regarding the products’ effects on consumers, workers who manufacture them, and the environment. Critics have asked whether extremely fine particles released into the air could damage the lungs. Could drugs that include nano-materials induce allergies, build up in the liver, combine with other molecules to produce toxins or simply inactivate bodily structures such as enzymes and thus cause disease? [San Francisco Chronicle].

While business groups praised the report and agreed that more health and safety research is necessary, they have argued in the past that concerns over nanotech are overblown. In the cosmetic arena, some have argued that nanoparticles in a cream that is slathered on the skin can’t get into the bloodstream. “It’s very difficult to get anything through the skin,” said John Bailey, the executive vice president for science of the Personal Care Products Council, an industry trade group in Washington. “The skin is a very effective barrier.” Indeed, some nanotechnology researchers said it was illogical to assume that a nano-size component inherently carries greater risk than a larger component. Furthermore, some say cosmetics may contain molecules like a silicone fluid called cyclopentasiloxane that are even smaller than nanomaterials [The New York Times].

Related Content:
80beats: Paper-Thin Nanotube Speakers Can Turn Up the Volume
80beats: Nanotubes Could Provide the Key to Flexible Electronics
DISCOVER: Nano Risks Worry Scientists

Image: Chantecaille

  • Andrew Maynard

    The safety issue is also critically important for ensuring innovation – check out

  • Chris Arnold

    I am the inventor of Non Detonation NanoDiamond tm (pure NanoDiamond) which provides the magical qualities behind the superlubrication products my company distributes. NanoDiamond is the safest of all known nano-materials and it enters our atmosphere daily, is non reactive and acids or bases cannot alter it. Some nano-products, like this one – are perfectly safe and industrially valuable. NanoDiamond is even being used in Cancer treatment. Our new product is Quicken® “Joint Lubrication” which lubricates arthritic joints for the removal of pain and swelling, with 95% success in even the most sever cases of arthritis. NanoDiamond – is the safest of all nano-materials.

  • rich

    i never knew that over 600 products were already on the market. yea, breathing them ? ingesting them ? the jury is still out !

  • Laurie Smith

    It’s very difficult to get anything through the skin,” said John Bailey, the executive vice president for science of the Personal Care Products Council, an industry trade group in Washington. “The skin is a very effective barrier.”

    These are the kind of idiots we have out there..

    The skin absorbs the lotion doesn’t it?? and what about our skin patches..they are absorbed into the bloodstream are they not?? and the NEW disease Morgellons has been proven by independant labs is NANO related those infected have NANO tubes coming out of their skin..causing horrific leasions on the body..infecting whole families including their pets!!

    NO..NANO technology has not been tested properly to ensure our safety and usual GREED OVER RULES SAFETY..soon as class action lawsuits begin..the truth will prevail. Morgellons

  • jb

    “It’s very difficult to get anything through the skin,” said John Bailey, the executive vice president for science of the Personal Care Products Council, an industry trade group in Washington. “The skin is a very effective barrier.”

    Liar! Liar!

    It’s like asking the criminals whether they have committed any crimes!

    In fact, the skin has pores, that absorb all things, including poisons. The skin is part of the WHOLE body, and anything affecting it, effects the health of the ENTIRE body.

    That’s why there are CREAMS for the skin, in the firt place.

    That’s why when you have skin cancer, it can be fatal. That’s why skin diseases HAVE to be treated!

    And the general news media passes the nanotech lies along to the public.They must think we, THE PEOPLE, are ignorant peasants from the Middle Ages. That’s what the Corporations and Elite want us to be! Dragging ourselves in through the mud and subservient and too sick to even protest our treatment.

    These nanoproducts are another way to keep us down!

    I’m at the point, where NO MATTER WHAT, I’m ANGRY and will NOT take it anymore!

  • http://Yahoo nita taefi

    Nano, Nano! I remember when computers were larger that a double wide fridge. Then 5 x 5 (approx.) squares with diotes, capacitors, etc. became the big thing. Now, you don’t (or can’t) see the inner workings of computers much less technology developed to course through the body to find problems. It still boggles the mind to think something smaller than dandruff acts as eyes in the vastness of space contained in our bodies.

  • http://Yahoo nita taefi

    jb you are correct. The skin does indeed absorb harmful applications or even diseases from other people. It is how patches attached to the skin treat (or harm) the body.

  • casman

    Can anyone say MORGELLONS disease?????
    Nano Bots are on the move. Thank you..,NOT!!

  • clay

    That dude “rich” has a big cheek advertising his lousy voice and video on You Tube. His tuneless voice will be playing back its nonsense “goldiehouse” “emmanuel” lyrics into my mind all night. I won’t be able to sleep, let alone prevent all the nanobots from invading the odd scratch on my skin. Looking above.. now I’ll definitely not sleep ‘cos I’m gonna have to search for MORGELLONS disease (presumably, you don’t get that at Carnegie Mellon) -:)casman -:)

  • Chris Arnold

    I have invented a new lubricant that will allow tighter clearances and prevent wear. It is called NanoLube at and I can provide a free sample if you want to see the magic for yourself.

    To quote Laurie Smith “These are the kind of idiots we have out there..” she is saying Morgellons are nanotubes sticking out of the skin – except a nanotube cannot possibly be seen or felt because it is too small. This is a case of total fear of the unknown, and misinformation by the misinformed. Morgellons is not the result of nanotubes – but something else entirely.

    NanoDiamond joint lubrication is totally nontoxic, and “non-tubular”, as the particles are spherical. Do not fear new technology, fear the idiots claiming it should be ignored!

  • Alex

    @ Chris – I would gladly check out a sample of your nano lubricant. My mother, suffering from arthritis would probably be eternally grateful to you if your ointment could help her walk. Please let me know if it would be possible to send the sample to Ontario, Canada.

    BTW, I’m a big fan of self-sanitizing nano TiO2 coating by EnviroGTA. I have had it sprayed on all walls and ceilings in my entire house, particularly in the kitchen, bathroom and basement. Since then (it’s been 5 months already) my allergies have not returned and we’re all feeling much better, less tired, and overall more resilient to the Canadian winter:)
    A recent mold test in our basement has shown that the level of mold contamination has drastically decreased. In other words – I have nothing but good things to say about nanotechnology!

  • Taerog

    How about a comment from a less radical position . . .
    First there is bound to be toxic effects from nanotech . . because effectively everything as a toxic effect (EVERYTHING) in some concentration.

    The assumption that nanotech in general is more or less toxic then materials our normal environment is basically a unfounded assumption.

    What needs to be done for EVERY product are tests, first basic tests to determine out right toxicity then extended tests to determine longer range effects.

    So, please people do not go off and assume that these materials are toxic because they are “synthetic”. (a rather irrelevant term here) a kicker is that some nanotech can even be considered “organic” (chemical compounds whose molecules contain carbon) This does not make them any less or more toxic BTW.

    Also lets not assume these materials can not be toxic or hold “magical” properties . . This means Nanolube also. “totally nontoxic” should read of unknown toxicity. just because it is in a “Food Grade Carrier oil” or non reactive does not make it edible. . . but on the other side, normally you do not eat most other lubricants and with most of those ingesting them would be toxic but handling them is not in most cases. Chances are, Nanolube is most likely somewhere in the “mostly harmless” range for the short run to unknown in the long run – like most materials on the planet.

    “I would gladly check out a sample of your nano lubricant. My mother, suffering from arthritis would probably be eternally grateful to you if your ointment could help her walk.” -Alex
    This is a lubricant for mechanical interfaces! not a magic salve that will help arthritis!!!! There is no known mechanism for these particles to migrate to needed areas through skin and tissue let alone do any good to a human joint! Please, do not jump for all snake oil because it now has the words Nano in them!

  • Bonsai King

    Nano technology is still too primitive for us to worry about. These nano materials are just small molecules and nothing more. Relax, give technology a chance.

  • Future4u

    I can attest to the effectiveness of the nanolube product . A requested that Chris send a supply to a friend o mine in Sweden . She treated the fuel and engine oil of her 1987 SAAB . It stopped smoking , ran quieter , easier to start on cold mornings and increased fuel economy by 28% . Her mechanic was amazed that the oil was not as contaminated as usual when he last had it serviced . Gasoline cost is about $9 per gallon there so that 28% looms large .

    You can lubricate your guns and stop the grooving o your gun barrel , speed up the trajectory thus improve accuracy . Make a clock that hasn’t worked in years begin clicking away again .

    She has a lot of pain from arthritis so will now try his quicken . A friend of hers is in constant pain from a back injury and doped up from the pain killers plus the numerous side effects so will also try it . It sure as hell can’t be any more toxic than the numerous drugs the medical profession deals out with nothing more to go on than the pharmasuetical ( sp? ) company’s salesman’s word .

    She told a person in Dubai about her experience . The lady in Dubai has an aluminum screw embedded in aluminum that was stripped and had tried everything with no success .
    A couple of drops and it came out with ease .

    His material works anywhere there is friction . He’s tested it in several independent laboratories an on several vehicles and other applications all with amazing results .

    I also know that Chris Arnold is an ethical and honest person .

  • Chris Arnold

    We discontinued free samples of NDN15ATM on 12/31/08 after occasionally offering them for two years.

    BTW, it was jammed titanium screws in a titanium housing.

  • Shueless1

    If Chris Arnold is peddling his snake oil here; BEWARE. He has been making false claims of patents and trademarks for years. On most of the forums that he posts, he is well known as an unstable individual. The fact that he is recommending his machine oil/lube for treatment of arthritis is a measure of his recklessness. Where’s your FDA test results, Chris? Or are you even registered with the FDA? Use NanoLube on my skin? I’d rather take investment advice from Madoff!!

  • Chris Arnold

    The only one slandering me and my work is the guy being sued for trademark and licensing infringement – Christian StClaire. He is a French lunatic/fraud that sells “regular oil” at $8,000 gallon but calls it nano-oil, perjured his testimony and babbles endlessly, just like shueless. See you in court Bozo.

    BTW, Grobet is a Swiss tool company that has been testing my breakthrough nano-lubrication for over a year, and now has signed on as “Exclusive Distributor” of our Clock and Watch lubricants – and they are the finest, slickest and best lubrication products that the industry has ever seen. Even severely worn parts start sliding again – which is why our motto is
    “There’s No Stickin’ with Quicken.”

    My discoveries are real and most of all “safe”, with Joint Lubrication products now available at

    Chris Arnold

  • Rojer


    Just how are these ‘non detonation nano-diamonds” produced? I’m finishing my Masters Degree in Physics, and none of my professors can think of a way to produce what you claim.

    I’d also like to know what kind of FDA testing you’ve done and honest, scientific data that shows any of the claims you’ve made.

  • Shueless1

    Mr.Arnold, I’ve taken the liberty of filing a complaint with the FDA on your medical claims above, including details of your website, address, etc. As far as “See you in court”, which court is that? You’re threatening to sue me? Bring it on! Scammers like you should be in jail.

  • Shueless1

    Here are some quotes on Mr. Arnold from other forums:

    In other words, “Not intended to diagnose, treat, or cure any illness…”

    “Is your workshop FDA, USDA, or State approved to handle skin care items? Have you taken the appropriate courses and are you certified to apply lotions?? Do you follow proper techniques for ensuring there are no contamination from one person to the next???

    Perhaps I should sue the shit out of you for giving me a rash on my knee. How do I know I didn’t get that as a result of your dirty hands, contaminated product, chemicals that are hazardous to health, or from another person that you put your dirty hands on, didn’t wash them, then touched me???
    Ya know, I’m going to file that complaint with the state today.”

    “Chris Arnold’s activity in the free energy groups would be a good place to start because there is a series of links between that activity and his latest scams which he has been trying to play out in this and other groups.

    Chris Arnold spamed the free energy groups with a poorly veiled invitations to invest in his free energy machine, Which as far as anyone could tell was simply a rotating carbon arc inside a metal sphere. He has moved in stages from free energy to what you have witnessed in this form. At each consecutive scam has failed to draw in a sufficient number of suckers.

    Free energy:

    Most of the so called inventors on the free energy groups are able to spin some intriguing yarn about the operation of their devices, but Arnold cannot. In particular, he cannot or would not say:
    1. Why he expected it to deliver any energy at all,
    2. Why he thought it would deliver over-unity,
    3. What evidence he had that the prototype was actually doing what he claimed,
    4. What explanation he had that, explained how he was able to defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    When he was laughed at he got cross and threatened people with legal action. Like a child trying to intimate somebody to shut their mouth up.

    If you want to take a lot at the type of ludicrous claims Arnold makes, one document can get your hands on is the patents for his bogus machine. It is US patent number 6271614. Which he now claims produces nanodiamonds.

    Nuclear Power:

    He wasn’t able to con enough suckers with that so he decided to spice it up with references to plasma it became a plasma machine. People did explain to him that plasmas were to be expected in electric arcs and his was nothing special. But that did not stop him from trying snag the suckers.

    Then he moved on to claims of nuclear fusion and the transmutation of elements. He became ever more ludicrous in his attempts to attract suckers, again without much success. As far as I know the only investment he attracted was from one guy, who by that time was already in thrall to the notorious Dennis Lee, and therefore obviously ripe for milking. But there may have been other suckers snared.


    Any enclosed electric carbon arc will cause a deposit on the inside of the container. Very well known and understood, a refined application of the principle is used in semiconductor manufacture. Under the right conditions this is does produce nanoparticles, but they are a they a impure mixture of different types and sizes. To date nobody found a way to sort and purify them and don’t be surprised if Arnold jumps in here claiming he has.

    So Arnold scraped the deposits from the inside of his gadget and endowed it with special properties. He hawked it gets the bum’s rush. As with his free energy claims, he offered nothing to back his claims, gets cross and litigious when people laughed at him.

    His targets, not unreasonably, wanted to know what the gunk comprised of and he had some rudimentary analyses carried out. When he found that there were traces of micro crystalline carbon there he promptly declared they nanodiamonds, and he’s been trying to find a use for the gunk ever since.


    From what little he’s said the gunk is not much different from soot, and predictably has traces of polycrystalline carbon. As he has never published a particle size spectrum from an accredited laboratory, tho he claims he has one but expects us to just take his word on it.

    As I touch upon above, vapor phase deposition is a recognized way of making nanodiamonds. The peculiar way in which he carries out the synthesis results in such an impure product that it might just as well be soot even if it did, by chance, contain any nanodiamonds. Regardless of this he has made a number of attempts to market the soot on the back of unsubstantiated claims that his soot has a pure nanodiamond content.


    Any suspension of soot in oil or solvent will lubricate quite well, long term performance is another matter. There are plenty of graphite based lubricants on the market, but again they contain graphite of much higher purity than Chris Arnold’s soot. So he might be able to claim, in all truthfulness, that his gunk is a lubricant, and that seems to be the sole property for which he offers testimonials but not proof, even tho he has been challenged many times to provide some proof of his claims. He has been challenged to provide documentation proof of specific performance claims that he has make about his gunk. The law requires documented proof of performance claims before such claim is used in advertising. To date he has not provided the required documentation.

    There are many players in the lubrication market and Arnold now seems intent of going after some of the smaller players in court. His preference for litigation rather than evidence is a recurring theme. This is where the saga of the two lubes begins. More on that later.

    Testimonials of reasonable lubricant properties alone don’t make Arnold’s gunk interesting and does not validate his claims of being a nanolube. He needs to publish something in the way of accredited analyses and efficacy tests and demonstrate that his machine does produce a nanopartical unlike any other produced by another source. That is the only way to prove the some of the allegations he has made against Mr StClaire. He has been told by many, that he needs to do this before he would be taken seriously by anybody. He disinclined to do this. Perhaps this is laziness or arrogance, or concern that the results might not support his claims.

    Chris Arnold was kicked off eBay for sharp practice. He has reestablished his eBay credentials and started selling his gunk under the name Quickenlube he did not have much success at this because … hell I don’t need to tell you guys why, you have already begun to figure it out.

    At the same time StClaire was selling his lube on eBay under the name Nanolube. At first nobody had Nanolube trademark registration that was active trademark. ( MO has already posted everything there is to see on the trademark records) All of sudden Arnold changes his product name to Nanolube and start a smear campaign against StClaire in his eBay posting. How exactly a smart way to build a customer base but I am not surprised Arnold’s interpersonal skills out right stink.

    Drug manufacturing.
    Arnold latest attempt to sell his soot come in the form of genuine snake oil sales, like something right out of a western novel. He is trying to sell his gunk as a joint pain reliever with the recycled name of Quickenlube. The same name and stuff he was trying to sell on eBay as a gun and watch lubricant.

    There just might be a sliver of merit in this twist, by now he should be rather experienced in producing dope.

    No this is not all of it but its a start. Brief enough? “

  • shueless1

    Arnold? It’s been over a month, where are you? No answer to the above rebuttals? No more diversionary lies or attacks?

    Oh well, he probably moved on to other forums he has yet to pollute.;)

  • Chris Arnold

    Shueless is clueless, and clearly an obsessive nut-case.

    Rojer, I would be happy to talk with your professors, (call 630-706-1250) and please note – Northwestern University (one of many) is now using biologically inert “NanoDiamond” in cancer treatment. At this time, I only provide products for superior lubrication – it is nothing more than the BEST.

    Chris Arnold (Inventor/President)
    NanoLube, Inc.

  • Shueless1

    Classic Arnold; don’t answer or provide information, just attack your detractors. I’m still waiting for your promised lawsuit, Chris. I see from the above that you now only supply lubricant; what happened to your arthritis cure? Did the FDA give you a call?

    And Rojer, read ALL the above first before talking to your professors (unless you all just want a good laugh). 😀

  • Chris Arnold

    Shueless1 is a pathological liar and obvious partner of the screwball in California that our lawsuit is against. You can see more of these insane rantings at under the forum owners list name of medulla oblongata (at least he told me he was the list owner, claimed to be the owner of ELITE AMMUNITION and gave me a nice Elite Ammunition Pen that still works, Key chain and business card at a local gun show). He also said it worked within 5 minutes on his bony knee. Could this be the same guy ranting here???

    All advertising has always clearly stated this is not a cure, it is superior lubrication that works within 5 minutes in 95% of those trying it.

  • Shueless1

    Tch, Tch, BANNED from another forum, I see. When will you learn that most intellegent people can see through your bull. Your lube, like any other, will work as such. What it ISN’t is:

    Patented (search of the site proves it)
    Registered trademarked (see above)
    Registered with the FDA (arthritis treatment)
    Independent lab-tested to prove your content claims
    A miracle, metal repairing compound.
    It won’t improve engines by 50%
    Hasn’t been reviewed (as your product) in any scientific journal
    Is not the Miracle cure you claim.

    See you on the ‘net.

  • http:/// Ryan J Herle


    You just supplied me with another claim to make in the lawsuit I’m working on against you.

    I never, not once told you your nanu lube “worked” on my knee. In fact, AND IN FRONT OF 4 WITNESSES, I told you it DID NOTHING and in fact GAVE ME A RASH ON MY KNEE; to which you replied “everyone else who’s tried it today bought it.” Then you walked off, gathered your supplies, and left the show. I had to seek medical treatment for the rash after three days, as the skin covering my knee sloughed off.

    You’re ‘medical lubricant’ is dangerous, unlicensed, produced outside of an FDA approved facility, and has not been scientifically tested for safety or compatibility with the human body.

    You’re going to get someone killed. And when you do, I hope they lock your scammin-ass up forever; because that’s the only way people like you will stop; when you’re thrown into an 8×10 room with bars for a front door. And even then you’ll likely tell everyone on the block about how you were “king of Plasma…”

    Your continuing mischaraterization of our conversations are the basis of the lawsuit I’m filing against you; They are libelous and Defamitory. My reputation has been harmed by your claims of my support of your product, when in fact I’ve only ever said it was “WORTHLESS” and “A SCAM.”

    Keep adding on additional ammunition for me to fire at you; it’ll only make the judgement more profitable for me in the end.

    By the way, you have only 4 hours left to supply me with a verifyable MSDS for your product; failure to comply WILL result in me speed-dialing the Consumer Product Safety Comission, The Environmental Protection Agency, and the Poison Control Center.

  • Ryan J Herle

    Alright, Arnie.

    No MSDS, calls have been made, E-mail’s made, formal complaints filed.

    I also hear that at 11:00 CDT today, 15APR09, your lawsuit against StClaire was DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, your injunction was struck down (meaning your claim to ‘trademark’ status of Nanolube was invalidated), you were ordered to pay attorneys fees and costs/expenses of StClaire, and you were thoroughly embarassed.

    You lost your bid to replace your attorney, Esquire Drenk (who you owe tons of money to), and your rediculous motions were denied.

    For anyone who wants to see the absolute bizarre behaviour of Chris Arnold, “Inventor,” e-mail to my @ RJHerle(at) and I will e-mail to you the HANDWRITTEN motions of Chris Arnold, his bizarre “demands” from his attorney, and his accusations AGAINST HIS OWN ATTORNEY.

    Chirs, you’re despicable. And in my opinion, a liar, thief, scam artist, mentally unbalanced, and otherwise unsuitable for living outside of a mental institution.

    But what should I really expect from a guy who calls his mother “my God and Angel?”

    Really, Chris, its time to cut the cord, stand on your own two feet, and realize that you’re not special, you’re not an inventor, you’re not a good liar, and you’re nothing more than a never-was.

    -Ryan J Herle, CEO
    Elite Ammunition Inc.

  • Chris Arnold

    I have forwarded your slanderous and libelous statements to the attorney that is preparing the new complaint against Peter Artisuk of Lombard Illinois and Christian StClaire of California. I cannot comment further, other than to say read the first sentence.

    Chris Arnold (president)
    NanoLube, Inc.
    9 N. Main Street
    Lombard, IL 60148

  • shueless1

    Chris Arnold is now in Contempt of Court in Illinois for not obeying the judges order that he pay Defendant St.Claire’s legal fees. He has also not paid court-ordered fees to the Arbitrator in the now-dismissed case, and has not paid his lawyers, either. Poor Mr. Artisuk is Arnold’s former employer (I bet he regrets the day he hired him as a truck driver, LOL), and was dismissed from the previous suit early on for lack of evidence.

    I also see that “Arthritis treatment” claims have been removed from Arnold’s website, which brings us back to the original subject of this Blog: “Nanotech products…have unknown health and safety risks”. Mr. Arnold is one of the less intelligent purveyors of internet snakeoil, as most of the readers of this blog, and other forums, discover in short order. The moral of this blog is “let the buyer beware”. As far as the original subject I think he has amply proven this point.

  • http:/// Ryan J Herle

    Another example of Arnie’s obvious inability to understand the English Language.

    Arnie, SLANDER means “uttered libelous remarks.” UTTERED means “SPOKEN.”

    This is in PRINT, therefore your claim would be LIBEL.

    I stand behind my statements of opinion, and would love for you to sue me; I’d be more than happy to call you to the stand, under oath, and have you attempt to explain how you attempted to entice me to defraud my customers; an act known as “SUBORNATION OF A CRIME.”

    Arnie, in my opinion, you’re a lying scumbag snakeoil salesman. In my opinion, you’re a dirty rotten liar and thief. In my opinion you need to be locked up in prison for false and misleading business activities; and in my opinion, you’re mentally unstable.

    I am glad to hear that you’ve removed your, in my opinion, medically dangerous products from the market; I hope that my complaints to the FDA had something to do with it.

  • Chris Arnold None of my products have been removed from any of my websites, and Subornation of a crime – like Herle knowingly assisting someone breach a court ordered injunction to sell a counterfeit product – is that what you mean, moron?

    My old lawyer has been fired, and he can no longer assist the other side.

    My breakthrough lubricants are the safest on Earth, and the primary ingredient is 100% INERT, while it is shueless and Herle that are TOXIC. They also support those we are suing, who are attempting to steal this breakthrough techology.

    The new case against Precision Millwright and Machine, Peter Artisuk, StClaire USA LLC and Christian StClaire has been filed, and is 09CH1928 in DuPage County Illinois.

  • http:/// Ryan J Herle


    1: to induce secretly to do an unlawful thing
    2: to induce to commit perjury ; also : to obtain (perjured testimony) from a witness

    How on earth do you figure I’ve ‘suborned’ anything? By telling people that my opinion is you’re a liar?

    Seriously, get some xanax; you need it.

    Arnie, nobody’s trying to steal anything from you; conversely, you’ve actually caused harm, through deception and malicious unfounded lawsuits, to third parties.

    You’re a menace to society.

    You’re lubricants are repackaged synthetic motor oil with soot from an arcing DC motor brush mixed in. The only thing revolutionary about your product is in the synthetic motor oil; created by someone else, and sold by you at more than $26,000 per gallon. I’d sure love to find out who’s oil you’re using, so I could drop them a note and let them know.. I doubt they’d look kindly on you repackaging their product. In fact, I believe that they’d likely sue you. Which would be a welcome change from you suing everyone.

    You’re insane IMHO, Arnie; and I hope that this time you actually get what you have coming to you (a short drop and a quick stop).

    But keep accusing me of things… It only makes my claim against you stronger (and eventually more profitable).


    Stop lying Arnie, if you’re capable (which I highly doubt).

  • Ryan J Herle

    The newest diatribe from Arnie includes accusations that I “beat my wife.”

    Quite a tall tale; considering I don’t have one.

    Beware anyone who consideres doing business with Christopher Arnold; In my opinion, he’s a delusional sociopath and will stop at nothing to further his goals; which are to make himself appear as some kind of genious, when the exact opposite are true.

    Christopher Arnold, in my opinion, is a raving psychotic lunatic; and should be approached with caution.

  • Chris Arnold

    I invented a Universal Lubricant and some people don’t like the idea that I have a superior product. BTW – we have filed suit against someone Herle is involved with, which explains Herle’s behavior here. DuPage County IL, case number 09CH1928 NanoLube, Inc vs Peter Artisuk (Lombard, IL), Precision Millwright and Machine (Addison IL), Christian StClaire(CA) and StClaireUSA LLC (CA).

    If anyone would like to see how absolutely vulgar, disgusting and filthy Mr Hurle can be, you can read his swear filled posts on yahoo groups ALL-Energy, where he acts like a drunken degenerate. BTW, he owns Elite Ammo in Illinois if you need some overpriced ammo. is my other website

  • Chris Arnold

    In most cases, Arthritis requires only one thing – lubrication.

    My Nanomaterial is synthetic diamond, inert, spherical, anti-abrasive, non reactive and above all – safe to use, and safety tested last year by Stanford Medical Center under a Navy contract. The contact said that NanoLube, Inc’s lubricant was excellent and did not fail under whatever tests they performed. and search under NanoLube for multiple product demonstrations

  • Eliza Strickland

    I’m cutting off comments on this thread. This isn’t intended to be a forum for people to trade insults and accusations. If indeed lawsuits have been filed, as some of these comments suggest, then you all can take up your argument in court.


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


80beats is DISCOVER's news aggregator, weaving together the choicest tidbits from the best articles covering the day's most compelling topics.

See More

Collapse bottom bar