"
Team:Harvey Mudd/Safety
From 2012.igem.org
(Prototype team page) |
Jwentworth (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | <!-- *** What falls between these lines is the Alert Box! You can remove it from your pages once you have read and understood the alert *** | + | <!-- *** What falls between these lines is the Alert Box! You can remove it from your pages once you have read and understood the alert ***> |
<html> | <html> | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
</html> | </html> | ||
| - | < | + | <*** End of the alert box *** --> |
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| - | + | 1. Our project does not raise any unusual public or environmental safety issues. We are only working with E. Coli, which is classified as a biosafety level 1 organism. All of our wetlab team members have received lab safety training, and standard protocols are followed for waste disposal. We are not using any toxin-producing plasmids. In general, we are following standard protocols which have successfully and safely been used in our school labs for many years. | |
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | 2. None of our new parts raise safety issues. They are only promoters and RNA-based repressors; we are not submitting any protein-coding sequence. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | 3. Our school biosafety committee says that our project "falls under the general biosafety umbrella of work already going on in those lab spaces". In other words, our methods, protocols, and safety procedures all follow established and time-tested precedents. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 4. The best way to guarantee safety is to stick with standard procedures. The more people who have used a protocol, the less chance that there is an unknown risk. Since our innovation is in computational parts, we stuck with time-tested protocols for all of our wetlab work. | ||
Revision as of 22:04, 7 September 2012
| Home | Team | Official Team Profile | Project | Parts Submitted to the Registry | Modeling | Notebook | Safety | Attributions |
|---|
1. Our project does not raise any unusual public or environmental safety issues. We are only working with E. Coli, which is classified as a biosafety level 1 organism. All of our wetlab team members have received lab safety training, and standard protocols are followed for waste disposal. We are not using any toxin-producing plasmids. In general, we are following standard protocols which have successfully and safely been used in our school labs for many years.
2. None of our new parts raise safety issues. They are only promoters and RNA-based repressors; we are not submitting any protein-coding sequence.
3. Our school biosafety committee says that our project "falls under the general biosafety umbrella of work already going on in those lab spaces". In other words, our methods, protocols, and safety procedures all follow established and time-tested precedents.
4. The best way to guarantee safety is to stick with standard procedures. The more people who have used a protocol, the less chance that there is an unknown risk. Since our innovation is in computational parts, we stuck with time-tested protocols for all of our wetlab work.
