. 24/7 Space News .
Who Really Controls BU's Biodefense Lab

illustration only
by Dee Ann Divis
Washington DC (UPI) Jul 30, 2004
Opponents of a Boston biodefense laboratory are not persuaded by assurances the lab will be safe and they doubt officials at the university in charge of building the facility really have the ability to control the work done there.

Set within the city limits at the Boston University Medical Center, and surrounded by nearly 600,000 people in the greater metropolitan area, the lab is one of the federal government's two new National Biocontainment Laboratories. It will house a Biosafety Level 4 laboratory as well BSL-3 and BSL-2 labs with less strict containment. A BSL-4 lab, with seals and a negative air flow to trap pathogens inside, is required for work with the deadliest bacteria and viruses.

The history of these laboratories is very safe. In the nearly 80 years of combined operation of these Level-4 laboratories in North America there's never been a community incident or environmental release, said Ellen Berlin, a BUMC spokeswoman.

Look at space shuttle. We had the best technology in the world. (We had) safe guards in place, (but) accidents happen, said Tomas Aguilar, a spokesman for opposition group Alternatives for Community & Environment. Just think if these pathogens escape out into the neighborhood. What then?

Aguilar noted there was an elementary school within a few blocks of the proposed site and a residential neighborhood nearby with a mix of condos and housing projects.

ACE is not the only group worried about safety. The Boston City Council held a hearing on the subject earlier this year and three council members support legislation to ban the lab. They wrote in the legislation the protection of the health and safety of the residents ... is more important than the economic development stimulus that could potentially result from Boston University's receipt of the grant.

It was during a city council meeting on lab safety that questions arose over whether Boston University would actually control the facility and be able to say no to unwise projects.

One of the things that the community here said is, 'look, you can't make any promises,' said an opponent of the lab who asked not to be identified. They're not going to necessarily know what is going on or be able to run the building.

The problem is BU does not have a contract to operate the lab, only a contract to build one. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in Bethesda, Md., confirmed to United Press International it will be a couple of years before the agency begins the process of contracting for lab management.

The concern first arose during the bidding process for the contracts. Potential bidders asked whether the National Institutes of Health would control 100 percent of the activity in the building. Because NIAID is part of NIH, the lab would have to give its biodefense work preferential treatment.

A letter to BU from NIAID still left unclear the who will control the facility.

Research to be conducted at the NBL will be at the determination of BU in accordance with its respective existing research review procedures (Biosafety, animal care) and consistent with the NIAID Biodefense Research Agenda, said an April 26 letter from Rona Hirschberg, the senior program officer. Whether the protocols would have any teeth, or be simple lists of procedures, remains unresolved.

Dr. Mark Klempner, principal investigator at the new lab, sought to stake the issue to the ground in an interview with UPI.

We will own, operate (and) manage, he told UPI. All the research protocols -- including the people involved in the research, the nature of the research, the purpose of it, the detail of how the research will be conducted, the relative risk benefit, the ethics of the research as it pertains to animals and humans -- will be reviewed and subject to approval by the Boston University Medical Center Committee.

He also said review committees would have the right to say no to research projects and would have people from the community as members.

It reads well, but such a strong statement will be worth little if NIAID, the chaps with the check book, disagree. Fortunately for lab proponents NIAID seems more inclined towards the idea that control should be local.

In response to a request from UPI, the agency sent the following somewhat clearer statement on control at Boston University and University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston where the other national biocontainment lab is located:

Research to be conducted at the NBLs will be at the determination of BU and UTMB in accordance with their respective existing research review procedures (biosafety, animal care, etc.) and consistent with the NIAID Biodefense Research Agenda.

This stronger statement, that research will be at the determination of BU, supports BU's assertion of control. If this is the case, it also should support the university's other assurance to Boston residents it will not conduct classified studies.

Classified research, though necessary in some instances, raises issues on a campus like BUMC's.

First, it arguably can be seen as more dangerous -- otherwise it should not be classified.

Second, even if a classified project is safe, average people will not know that and the secrecy, in and of itself, raises anxiety.

There is a third, albeit less obvious, problem with classified work: BUMC is a teaching facility and BU grad students could be working on biodefense projects said Berlin. Classified research would change the atmosphere of the campus, leaving some students on outside of the traditionally open exchange of information. Grad students on classified projects could find themselves cut off from publishing results, undermining their careers. These are some of the key reasons the Massachusetts Institute of Technology decided not to allow classified research projects on its campus.

NIAID officials said it does not do classified research has no such plans. They left the door open, however, to change the policy, saying it is possible that in the future the criteria for what should and should not be classified might change.

If NIAID changed its policy about classified research, would the national labs -- in particular the one at BU -- have to follow suit?

Our position is very simple, Klempner said. BUMC does not support any secret or classified research and we have no plans to do so." If BU officials really do make the decisions, then they ought to be able to make the decision against conducting classified projects stick.

Still, one must wonder what the reality would be in a crisis. When anthrax letters began arriving in the fall of 2001, the federal government tossed out the normal negotiating procedures and pushed the manufacturer of the antibiotic Cipro into a special deal. State laws covering outbreaks of disease permit extraordinary actions, such as quarantine under armed guard.

Who knows what would happen if there were another bioterrorism attack? One hopes local control is never put to the test.

All rights reserved. Copyright 2004 by United Press International. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of by United Press International.

Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express

Satellite Navigation Could Make Olympic Games Safer
Athens (ESA) Aug 02, 2004
A future step up in security for the Olympic Games and other such events could come with help from space thanks to technologies being developed by the European Space Agency.



Thanks for being here;
We need your help. The SpaceDaily news network continues to grow but revenues have never been harder to maintain.

With the rise of Ad Blockers, and Facebook - our traditional revenue sources via quality network advertising continues to decline. And unlike so many other news sites, we don't have a paywall - with those annoying usernames and passwords.

Our news coverage takes time and effort to publish 365 days a year.

If you find our news sites informative and useful then please consider becoming a regular supporter or for now make a one off contribution.
SpaceDaily Contributor
$5 Billed Once


credit card or paypal
SpaceDaily Monthly Supporter
$5 Billed Monthly


paypal only














The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2016 - Space Media Network. All websites are published in Australia and are solely subject to Australian law and governed by Fair Use principals for news reporting and research purposes. AFP, UPI and IANS news wire stories are copyright Agence France-Presse, United Press International and Indo-Asia News Service. ESA news reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by Space Media Network on any Web page published or hosted by Space Media Network. Privacy Statement All images and articles appearing on Space Media Network have been edited or digitally altered in some way. Any requests to remove copyright material will be acted upon in a timely and appropriate manner. Any attempt to extort money from Space Media Network will be ignored and reported to Australian Law Enforcement Agencies as a potential case of financial fraud involving the use of a telephonic carriage device or postal service.