Team:UConn/Safety
From 2012.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
(Prototype team page) |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
Line 31: | Line 14: | ||
- | + | 1. Our project ideas do not raise any know issues of public or environmental safety. To ensure researcher safety we are using standard laboratory practices as there is always an inherent risk when working with biological agents. | |
+ | 2. To the best of our knowledge, our new biobrick parts do not raise any safety issues. | ||
+ | 3. No, to our knowledge there is no local biosafety group, committee or review board at the University of Connecticut. We must follow the University of Connecticut Code of Conduct and the regulations for working with biological materials as laid out by the State of Connecticut and the Government of the United States. | ||
+ | 4. Currently, we do not have any ideas for future iGEM competitions dealing with safety issues. |
Revision as of 02:58, 8 September 2012
Home | Team | Official Team Profile | Project | Parts Submitted to the Registry | Modeling | Notebook | Safety | Attributions |
---|
1. Our project ideas do not raise any know issues of public or environmental safety. To ensure researcher safety we are using standard laboratory practices as there is always an inherent risk when working with biological agents.
2. To the best of our knowledge, our new biobrick parts do not raise any safety issues.
3. No, to our knowledge there is no local biosafety group, committee or review board at the University of Connecticut. We must follow the University of Connecticut Code of Conduct and the regulations for working with biological materials as laid out by the State of Connecticut and the Government of the United States.
4. Currently, we do not have any ideas for future iGEM competitions dealing with safety issues.