From 2011.igem.org

Revision as of 17:45, 3 September 2011

ITESM MÉXICO

SensE.coli

Safety proposal

File:Biosecurity 2.tif

1. Would any of your project ideas raise safety issues in terms of:

   • researcher safety,
   • public safety, or
   • environmental safety?

   Our Project works with bacteria (Escherichia coli), a strain that is no pathogenic, nor it harmful to plants, animals or human beings. Nonetheless every broth, agar and material involved in the culturing of the bacteria is autoclaved and disposed with the biosecurity residues.

   With a fully-characterized recombinant organism (a clone of E. coli K12, for instance), there is no reason to think that the hazard will be any more than indicated by the insert and its product. The risk assessment will then simply be a consideration of the extent of expression of the insert and the chance of damage caused by the product of such expression (Tzotzos, 1995).

   The microorganism that we will be working with belongs to Hazard Group 1 which means is unlikely to cause a human disease, and so we can say we are working in Biosafety level 1.

   Nonetheless every broth, agar and material involved in the culturing of the bacteria is autoclaved and disposed with the biosecurity residues.

2. Do any of the new BioBrick parts (or devices) that you made this year raise any safety issues? If yes,

   • 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?

   Our new biobricks are devices created to stop and regulate the expression of non-essential genes. This means that they do not represent a risk due to the incapability of interfering with normal cell functions. They do not require a toxic component to operate and are designed to be implemented in a bacterial environment that can be considered non harmful to humans and that is easily controlled.

3. Is there a local biosafety group, committee, or review board at your institution?

   Our Educational Institution has no formal committee or biosafety group. The professors that are aiding us in the project, have rules and regulations in order to avoid biosecurity bridges, we have been trained in different classes the usage of laboratory manuals and how to work safely at the laboratory, and how to report dangerous spills in order for them to take care of the situation. Nevertheless, the facilities in which we are working and developing the project have been designed according to international standards. In Mexico, we have two main institutes in charge of biosecurity:

   • InDRE (Instituto de Diagnóstico y Referencia Epidemiológicos)
   • CIBIOGEM (Comisión Intersecretarial de Bioseguridad de los Organismos Genéticamente Modificados)

   However, the InDRE (regulated by CDC) does not produce enough manuals and information, nonetheless, during the inauguration of the laboratories, they came to review the safety standards and there were no comments on any problems. We also had a Workshop from CDC in our laboratories, and they congratulate us on the facilities and the rules they set, were the ones that were taught to us by our mentors. That is why we decided to base our laboratory practices in accordance to World Health Organization (WHO) Laboratory Biosafety Manuals and the US government CDC manuals.

4. 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?

   Many countries do not have proper biosafety protocols and although many teams have not engaged in risky projects, as the competition evolves and more BioBricks become available to future teams the challenges and hazards involved in the design of biomachines will increase; therefore this problem will gain even more significance. Preparedness is essential.

   Taking this into consideration, it would be useful or even necessary to create a committee of biosafety for the iGEM competition that regulates all the procedures in the laboratory and evaluate the possible risks that projects may implicate. This safety protocols could be created by the iGEM community, discussed and proposed to be used by competing teams. The development of this idea could help to every competing team that does not count with organisms or supervisors regarding this area.

   Biosafety engineering can contribute with the safety of parts, devices and systems if, in line with the interest of achieving a final product that reaches high quality standards, diverse procedures and practices were considered since their development in laboratories, for example those related with safety precautions, lab workers protection, assessment and managing, safe transportation of materials and substances, monitoring national/ international legislations, among others. It is relevant to consider the far-reaching concept of biosafety, which involves the use of tools and methods in order to guarantee a responsible use of biotechnology. Safety procedures must be included in every biotechnological development since its conception, so every person involved (enterprising people, regulatory organisms, and consumers), could acquire appropriate protocols. Biosafety engineering can be greatly helpful in the construction of safe projects, parts, devices and systems which will provide credibility, confidence; therefore the possibility of social acceptance and integration.

References:

• Tzotzos, G (1995). Genetically modified organisms: a guide to biosafety. International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, C.A.B. International
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011). Biosafety: Publications and Forms. Retrieved from: http://www.cdc.gov/biosafety/publications/index.htm
• World Health Organization (2011). International Health Regulations: Biosafety and Laboratory Security. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/ihr/biosafety/en/