"
Team:MSOE Milwaukee/Safety
From 2013.igem.org
Vanhandelp (Talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Team:MSOE}} | {{Team:MSOE}} | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
| - | + | Would any of your project ideas raise safety issues in terms of researcher safety, public safety, or environmental safety?<br><br> | |
| + | |||
| + | Answer: Our project of synthesizing Eucalyptol using E.coli and waste products from beer production does not raise many safety issues. The DE3 strain of E.coli that we decided to use is not pathogenic and is commonly used here at MSOE. The most concerning safety issue regards the Eucalyptol. Eucalyptol can be toxic if used in higher than normal doses and is hazardous only at these levels. The LD50 for this compound is 2480 mg/kg as previously tested on a rat. It is dangerous via ingestion, skin contact, or inhalation and is a suspect reproductive toxin. However, these hazards are only associated in doses that will not be attained in our lab through its synthesis in E.coli, so these risks are minimized. <br><br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Do any of the new BioBrick parts (or devices) that you made this year raise safety issues? If yes, <br> | ||
| + | • How did you document these issues in the Registry? <br> | ||
| + | • How did you manage to handle the safety issue? <br> | ||
| + | • How could other teams learn from your experience?<br><br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Answer: We do not anticipate any major safety concerns with any of our parts. Eucalyptol, our projected product, is only toxic at doses that will not be produced in our lab. If this part is ever used to create the levels of Eucalyptol required to be toxic, certain safety precautions will have to be taken to ensure the safety of the researchers. An example of an extra safety precaution used in this situation would include more personal protection equipment (PPE).<br><br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Is there a local biosafety group, committee, or review board at your institution? <br> | ||
| + | • If yes, what does your local biosafety group think about your project?<br> | ||
| + | • If no, which specific biosafety rules or guidelines do you have to consider in your country?<br><br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Answer: No, MSOE does not have a biosafety group, committee, or review board. We need to pay the closest attention to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules and to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules.<br><br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Do you have any other ideas how to deal with safety issues that could be useful for future iGEM competitions? How could parts, devices, and systems be made even safer through biosafety engineering?<br><br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Answer: The parts registry could find a way to quarantine the biobricks that encode for any toxic substances so that the team is aware of the extra dangers that come with working with a toxic substance. The teams could also be asked to provide protocols on working with these substances to ensure that proper safety procedures are followed. <br><br> | ||
Revision as of 18:36, 25 June 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Would any of your project ideas raise safety issues in terms of researcher safety, public safety, or environmental safety?
Answer: Our project of synthesizing Eucalyptol using E.coli and waste products from beer production does not raise many safety issues. The DE3 strain of E.coli that we decided to use is not pathogenic and is commonly used here at MSOE. The most concerning safety issue regards the Eucalyptol. Eucalyptol can be toxic if used in higher than normal doses and is hazardous only at these levels. The LD50 for this compound is 2480 mg/kg as previously tested on a rat. It is dangerous via ingestion, skin contact, or inhalation and is a suspect reproductive toxin. However, these hazards are only associated in doses that will not be attained in our lab through its synthesis in E.coli, so these risks are minimized.
Do any of the new BioBrick parts (or devices) that you made this year raise safety issues? If yes,
• How did you document these issues in the Registry?
• How did you manage to handle the safety issue?
• How could other teams learn from your experience?
Answer: We do not anticipate any major safety concerns with any of our parts. Eucalyptol, our projected product, is only toxic at doses that will not be produced in our lab. If this part is ever used to create the levels of Eucalyptol required to be toxic, certain safety precautions will have to be taken to ensure the safety of the researchers. An example of an extra safety precaution used in this situation would include more personal protection equipment (PPE).
Is there a local biosafety group, committee, or review board at your institution?
• If yes, what does your local biosafety group think about your project?
• If no, which specific biosafety rules or guidelines do you have to consider in your country?
Answer: No, MSOE does not have a biosafety group, committee, or review board. We need to pay the closest attention to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules and to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules.
Do you have any other ideas how to deal with safety issues that could be useful for future iGEM competitions? How could parts, devices, and systems be made even safer through biosafety engineering?
Answer: The parts registry could find a way to quarantine the biobricks that encode for any toxic substances so that the team is aware of the extra dangers that come with working with a toxic substance. The teams could also be asked to provide protocols on working with these substances to ensure that proper safety procedures are followed.
