4.8 Review

A Call for Increased Focus on Reproductive Health within Lab Safety Culture

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 143, Issue 32, Pages 12422-12427

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jacs.1c03725

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1176590]
  2. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [1745302]
  3. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1176590] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The approach to reproductive health and safety in academic laboratories needs more attention and a paradigm shift, with current practices often placing the burden on pregnant or planning-to-conceive individuals, leading to inconsistencies and confusion. To promote safer and more inclusive laboratory environments, consistent and clear information about reproductive health should be provided to laboratory researchers, and discussions about reproductive health should be normalized among all researchers.
The approach to reproductive health and safety in academic laboratories requires increased focus and a shift in paradigm. Our analysis of the current guidance from more than 100 academic institutions' Chemical Hygiene Plans (CHPs) indicates that the burden to implement laboratory reproductive health and safety practices is often placed on those already pregnant or planning conception. We also found inconsistencies in the classification of potential reproductive toxins by resources generally considered to be authoritative, adding further confusion. In the interest of human health and safe laboratory practice, we suggest straightforward changes that institutions and individual laboratories can make to address these present deficiencies: Provide consistent and clear information to laboratory researchers about reproductive health and normalize the discussion of reproductive health among all researchers. Doing so will promote safer and more inclusive laboratory environments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available