“This survey is a baseline study that leaves more questions than answers, but a perception survey is supposed to raise questions that need to be looked at,” said Lou DiBerardinis, head of health and safety at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge. DiBerardinis is on one of four teams to receive seed funding in 2012 from the Center for Laboratory Safety to study safety. He is working on a project led by MIT anthropologist Susan Silbey to track changing safety cultures by monitoring inspection records over seven years.
Zolandz says that this year, the National Academies Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology will team up with behavioral scientists to develop practical guidance for researchers on how to establish a better safety culture. In the various efforts that have followed Sangji’s death, “that’s one piece of the puzzle that’s been missing”, she says. “How do you get people to buy into safety?”
This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on January 2, 2013.
See what we're tweeting about
4 Comments
Add CommentMy mom worked in a lab and handled volatile chemicals when she was pregnant with me. I was born with club foot. Fortunately, I had surgery to correct it and it's barley even noticeable now apart from my skinny ankles. Nevertheless, my point is that having children with birth defects is another risk of working in labs.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis article also make me wonder about the question of whether hazard signage is kept up to date and whether campus police and/or local police/fire/rescue could be endangered themselves in coming to the aid of a lab worker.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHaving worked over 35 years in both industrial & academic R&D I always felt much safer in industrial laboratories. The culture of safety in the university is virtually non-existent. When I interviewed with the Health & Safety group of a major public university, I was told that actually inspecting a researchers laboratory would be considered a violation of their academic freedom. No training was available, & state environmental & safety agencies generally have no or limited jurisdiction on campuses. Absent the threat of criminal or civil action, there is little incentive to make safety a priority
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI had more responsibilities as an R&D manager in industry to provide regular safety training to my staff, then I ever saw in university labs. Worst case, first day on the job in a academic lab handling radioactive materials, my training consisted of "sign this".
In industry, it is clear that at least the insurance companies who would be forced to cover the damages from industrial accidents, have a reason to insure basic standards are followed . (This meant that in most industrial facilities, the insurance companies requires annual safety inspections to insure basic compliance).
Unlike industry, in academia there are little or no mechanisms to make safety a priority. The article here, enforces my opinion from experience, that a "tough guy" attitude pervades academic labs (we know how to "handle" this stuff, we don't need safety inspectors etc. After all, how often do "nerds" get to play tough). Undergraduates, research assistants, etc are in no position to challenge lax safety procedures of their academic supervisors, and have even less resources than industrial workers to report or get assistance
It will take major efforts to install a real respect for safety in academic environments.
If you want college labs to be safe then impose penalties on the board of regents/directors and the upper echelon of the college/university for lab accidents. Leadership and loyalty have to start at the top and work down or they are meaningless.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this