Team:Peking R/HumanPractice/Investigation2

From 2011.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 13: Line 13:
top:319px;
top:319px;
width:655px;
width:655px;
-
height:1723px;
+
height:2423px;
z-index:2;
z-index:2;
font-family: "Comic Sans MS", cursive;
font-family: "Comic Sans MS", cursive;
Line 102: Line 102:
position:absolute;
position:absolute;
left:547px;
left:547px;
-
top:2003px;
+
top:2403px;
width:144px;
width:144px;
height:28px;
height:28px;
Line 253: Line 253:
</div>
</div>
<div id="apDiv4">
<div id="apDiv4">
-
   <p>The  respondents all showed adequate levels of understanding in issues concerning  possible threats induced by abandoned ARB in the laboratory. Almost equal  proportions of respondents pointed out one of the four major consequences,  respectively(Q9). Unfortunately, statistics revealed that over one third of the  respondents reported that used ARB is never or only occasionally processed in  safe and professional ways, and that a considerable portion of them has no  special attention paid to the issue (Q5). Besides, results for Question 6 indicated  that very few (&lt;3%) laboratory researchers have been clearly informed of how  laboratory waste should be processed in their department/organization. Even if  they have somehow been informed, they did not pay much attention because they believed  that laboratory waste is being appropriately processed. It is interesting that  though people know that something like this may have negative effect on our  life, they believe that there will be someone else to be responsible for such  things. To make matters worse, more than half of the laboratories directly  dispose of materials that have been in direct contact with microbes, while some  others care little about the matter (Q8). This further adds to the potential  danger of pollution and transfer of antibiotic resistance to microbes in the  environment. Thus it seems that what is more urgent is not informing  researchers of potential safety hazards of ARB but how to strictly and  effectively regulate laboratory procedures to prevent these hazards. Most researchers  know the consequences of their behavior, but few would take the time and effort  to implement the right measures, probably because public health and environment  have not yet experienced crises of sufficiently alarming levels, which we  strongly wish, of course, to avoid.<br />
+
   <p><br />
   Question 5</p>
   Question 5</p>
   <p><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/7/73/PekingR_hp_Q5.png" width="500" height="426" hspace="50" /></p>
   <p><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/7/73/PekingR_hp_Q5.png" width="500" height="426" hspace="50" /></p>

Revision as of 11:59, 20 September 2011

Template:Https://2011.igem.org/Team:Peking R/bannerhidden Template:Https://2011.igem.org/Team:Peking R/back2 Template:Https://2011.igem.org/Team:Peking R/Humanpracticebackground 无标题文档

Investigation of Antibiotic Use and

Related Biosafety Issues: What's

happening out there and further.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Question 5

A.Almost always discard directly or pour into sewage(15.91%)

B.Usually discard directly and occasionally process them properly(22.73%)

C.Usually process them properly but occasionally discard directly(21.59%)

D.Always properly process them separately with other waste(23.86%)

E.No special attention has been paid(15.91%)

Question 6



Question 8


 

Retrieved from "http://2011.igem.org/Team:Peking_R/HumanPractice/Investigation2"