Tiffany.dang (Talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 1,040: | Line 1,040: | ||
<p class="c3">Our project utilized <span class="c8 c1">Bacillus subtilis</span><span class="c1"> and a commonly used lab-strain of </span><span class="c8 c1">Escherichia coli,</span><span class="c1"> TOP10. Both are non-pathogenic and non-infectious, and are classified as Biosafety Level 1 organisms (BSL-1). Therefore, these organisms posed no significant risk to researchers. Since the BSL-1 cells (</span><span class="c8 c1">E. coli</span><span class="c1"> and </span><span class="c8 c1">B. subtilis</span><span class="c1">) have GRAS labelling, the main cloning component of out project did not require ethics approval by review boards. Some team members worked with HCT116 and 1BR3 primary cell lines, which are human colon carcinoma and human skin fibroblast cell lines and are classified as Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2).The cell lines were received from completely anonymous donors. </span><span class="c4">We handled these cell lines at containment level 2 in accordance with the</span><span class="c1"> Bloodborne Pathogens Standard and Biosafety Committee</span><span class="c4"> guidelines.</span> | <p class="c3">Our project utilized <span class="c8 c1">Bacillus subtilis</span><span class="c1"> and a commonly used lab-strain of </span><span class="c8 c1">Escherichia coli,</span><span class="c1"> TOP10. Both are non-pathogenic and non-infectious, and are classified as Biosafety Level 1 organisms (BSL-1). Therefore, these organisms posed no significant risk to researchers. Since the BSL-1 cells (</span><span class="c8 c1">E. coli</span><span class="c1"> and </span><span class="c8 c1">B. subtilis</span><span class="c1">) have GRAS labelling, the main cloning component of out project did not require ethics approval by review boards. Some team members worked with HCT116 and 1BR3 primary cell lines, which are human colon carcinoma and human skin fibroblast cell lines and are classified as Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2).The cell lines were received from completely anonymous donors. </span><span class="c4">We handled these cell lines at containment level 2 in accordance with the</span><span class="c1"> Bloodborne Pathogens Standard and Biosafety Committee</span><span class="c4"> guidelines.</span> | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
+ | <br><p>With the tireless support of Dr. Craig Jenne, we submitted an extensive ethics application to the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (CHREB), which evaluated the applications on multiple grounds such as feasibility, morality, precautions, etc. of the testing of our transdermal patch on mice models. As well, Health Science Animal Care Committee (HSACC) scientifically reviewed our protocols, the scientific significance of our transdermal patch, and feasibility. HSACC approved our project under the above mentioned parameters. Furthermore, the protocols and the procedure were evaluated and were deemed moral and approved by Health Sciences Animal Care Committee (ACC).</p><br> | ||
<p><span></p></span> | <p><span></p></span> | ||
<h1><span>Safety Considerations for the Device</span></h1> | <h1><span>Safety Considerations for the Device</span></h1> |
Revision as of 04:00, 18 October 2016
Safety
Safety Considerations in the Lab
How we prepared for lab work
How we prepared for lab work
All Principal Investigators, mentors, and undergraduate researchers were required to complete lab safety training and safety courses developed by the University of Calgary's Environment Health and Safety (EHS) services prior to working in the lab. These mandatory safety training courses included courses on occupational health and safety, laboratory safety, hazard assessment, incident reporting and investigation, spill response, biosafety, bloodborne pathogens, and an updated versions of the WHMIS course. The courses cover biological containment protocols, handling of hazardous materials such as liquid nitrogen, and disposal of waste, as well as standard safety and laboratory practices. All required us to take a test following each course, which certified safe lab work under the EHS Guidelines. All team members, advisors, and mentors received credit for each course and training program listed, and supervisors were present in the lab at all times to oversee undergraduate work.
The University of Calgary has a university-wide Biosafety Committee, whose guidelines for safe biological laboratory practices were adhered to throughout the project. The team’s lab benches and experimental plans were assessed and deemed safe to proceed with by this Biosafety Committee. The Univerity's Environment Health and Safety (EHS) services provided additional training for individuals working with radiation and irradiated cells.
Our project utilized Bacillus subtilis and a commonly used lab-strain of Escherichia coli, TOP10. Both are non-pathogenic and non-infectious, and are classified as Biosafety Level 1 organisms (BSL-1). Therefore, these organisms posed no significant risk to researchers. Since the BSL-1 cells (E. coli and B. subtilis) have GRAS labelling, the main cloning component of out project did not require ethics approval by review boards. Some team members worked with HCT116 and 1BR3 primary cell lines, which are human colon carcinoma and human skin fibroblast cell lines and are classified as Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2).The cell lines were received from completely anonymous donors. We handled these cell lines at containment level 2 in accordance with the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard and Biosafety Committee guidelines.
With the tireless support of Dr. Craig Jenne, we submitted an extensive ethics application to the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (CHREB), which evaluated the applications on multiple grounds such as feasibility, morality, precautions, etc. of the testing of our transdermal patch on mice models. As well, Health Science Animal Care Committee (HSACC) scientifically reviewed our protocols, the scientific significance of our transdermal patch, and feasibility. HSACC approved our project under the above mentioned parameters. Furthermore, the protocols and the procedure were evaluated and were deemed moral and approved by Health Sciences Animal Care Committee (ACC).
Safety Considerations for the Device
Structure of the Patch
Choosing Patch Materials
Considering Human Use
Advantages of a Patch
Possible Problems with the Patch
In Vivo Mouse Trials
Containment
Future Considerations for Patch Design
Safe disposal:
Safety Considerations of Biobrick Parts
Future Considerations
Safety Forms