Survey of Bioscience Research Practices in Asia: Implications for Biosafety and Biosecurity

Abstract

Over 300 Asian life scientists were surveyed to provide insight into their work with infectious agents. This survey was designed to inform our understanding of the state of biosciences, laboratory biosecurity, and biosafety in Asia. The survey results can help to identify and address gaps in the development and implementation of policies and practices related to laboratory biosafety and biosecurity. In September and October of 2005, BioInformatics, LLC (Arlington, Virginia, USA) conducted a 30-question online survey. The questionnaire was fielded to registered members of The Science Advisory Board. Sponsored by BioInformatics, LLC, The Science Advisory Board is an online community of more than 28,000 scientists, physicians and healthcare professionals from around the world. The Science Advisory Board members who participated in this study were drawn from the Board's Research Panel and supplemented by additional qualified life scientists.For analysis, countries were divided into three tiers based upon their level of biotechnology sophistication: advanced (The respondents have a variety of research objectives and study over 60 different pathogens and toxins. Many of the respondents indicated that their work was hampered by a lack of adequate resources and difficulty in accessing critical resources. The survey results also demonstrate that there appears to be better awareness of laboratory biosafety issues as compared to laboratory biosecurity. Most laboratories employ simple biosecurity measures. Perhaps not surprisingly, many of these researchers work with pathogens and toxins under less stringent laboratory biosafety and biosecurity conditions than is typical for laboratories in the West. Fortunately, the study indicates that these respondents might be receptive to credible, unbiased information on biosafety and biosecurity policies and procedures. One straightforward way to do so is to take advantage of respondents' desire to stay connected with their scientific colleagues via collaborations. Only eight percent of respondents' laboratories do not collaborate.

Status of Laboratory Biosafety and Biosecurity in Veterinary Research Facilities in Nigeria

“…Laboratory biosafety and biosecurity are important in order to ensure researchers' safety, especially from laboratory acquired infections (LAIs), and to protect the public from accidental or intentional exposure to infectious pathogens [16]. These risks have raised a serious concern for the training of laboratory researchers [17].…”

Biorisk Assessment of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories in Nigeria

“…These infections could result in poor performance of laboratory personnel and, in extreme cases, loss of infected laboratory staff [2]. Laboratory-acquired infections involving contagious diseases have also demonstrated the potential to spread beyond the laboratory into the general community at large [3].…”

“…Several laboratory-associated infections have occurred in different parts of the world involving both known and previously unknown agents [3]. Use of protective clothing and safety gadgets alone may not guarantee the safety of the laboratory personnel.…”

Laboratory biosafety for handling emerging viruses

“…Risk assessment for biosecurity should review and make an inventory of the relevant assets, define the relevant threats, outline the particular vulnerabilities, and determine the countermeasures or mitigation strategies which are specific to each facility [45]. Good laboratory biosecurity system involves a multi-faceted approach that includes physical security, personnel security, biohazard material control and accountability, transport security, and information security [76] .…”