TAN, Sean Matthew S.
BE152_C21
BIOSAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ENGINEERING
Activity 2
(Laboratory accidents and breaches in biosafety)
The SARS CoV incidents 2003-2004
1. Singapore 2003
The incident that happened in Singapore is a prime example of how vulnerable scientists may be
to a virus. The PhD student of NUS desired to compare an isolate from Singapore with one from
the USA. The first thing to note was that the Biosafety level of the NUS lab was at BSL-2, and it
was stated that the isolate coming from New York (USA) had to be handled in a BSL-3 facility.
This is evident nowadays, especially after COVID-19, that all experiments involving SARS-CoV
strains have to be handled on BSL-3 facilities. Thus the first thing to notice would be the failure in
adhering to laboratory standards. The next thing to notice was how the technician from EHA left
the student unsupervised due to a meeting on the day which caused the student to contract
symptoms from the virus. Lastly, would be the fact that in Singapore, no standards were set at the
time regarding this subject matter.
What could have been done differently would be to either (1) have the research done in the USA
where BSL-3 laboratories were established and in a place where standards were set. (2)
Consistent supervision given to the student. Lastly (3) to have NUS and Singapore adapt the
standards of the USA at an earlier time as the student would be performing using isolates from
that country.
2. Taiwan 2003
The primary problem in this case was the poor performance of decontamination. The victim fell
into sickness because he not only inadequately cleaned his spill by going off protocol, but he also
worked alone and the investigation found that other management problems were present such as
inadequate staff training and the lack of operating procedures.
This incident could have been prevented if there were more staff present in the high-level
laboratory as the victim performed poor cleaning due to him being in a hurry and being alone.
Furthermore, even if one has priorities, it is still important to follow protocols on how to
decontaminate spills of deadly samples.
3. Beijing 2004
The incident in Beijing is indeed a more tragic one as multiple people had been affected and one
actually died, it is stated that none of the victims had worked in the SARS laboratory but it
happened because SARS laboratory had inactivated the antigen. This is a prime example of how
those who are not involved can be affected by the malpractice of one facility.
What could have been done would be that a proper and up-to-date technique would be employed
to activate the antigens for the SARS laboratory.