Laboratory accidents repeatedly recur.

　　Recent incidents—the poisoning attack on Fudan University’s campus and the laboratory explosion at Nanjing University of Science and Technology—have brought university chemical and laboratory safety into the spotlight. On the 24th of this month, the Ministry of Education issued a notice reaffirming that higher education institutions must strengthen the safe management of hazardous chemicals in laboratories. The notice outlines detailed regulations covering the classification, use, and administration of hazardous chemicals, underscoring the Ministry’s renewed emphasis on laboratory safety.

　　For the public, the back-to-back occurrence of these two tragedies appears to have rekindled memories of the “dangers” associated with university laboratories: in March 2012, laboratory equipment at South China University of Technology exploded, triggering a fire; in September 2011, two graduate students at East China University of Science and Technology were injured in an accidental explosion while conducting a chemistry experiment.

　　Internal and external factors are quietly lurking—confronting laboratory safety hazards head-on.

　　The issue of laboratory safety has been a subject of discussion for a long time. It is likely that every new laboratory worker is briefed on various rules and regulations, and the constant reminders and warnings naturally foster a high degree of caution. However, over time, lax oversight and the emergence of complacency or a sense of invulnerability can easily reduce laboratory safety protocols to mere formalities.

　　After reviewing and summarizing a large number of laboratory accidents, it is readily apparent that the majority of safety incidents can be traced back to researchers’ negligence, with a lack of oversight being the primary contributing factor.

　　Laboratory personnel are the direct operators of laboratory work; they have firsthand awareness of potential safety hazards and can promptly identify non‑compliant practices in their immediate environment. Only when laboratory staff first cultivate a strong sense of oversight can they, while ensuring their own compliance, promptly detect and report safety risks, thereby preventing accidents.

　　Southern Metropolis Daily reported that, during a visit to a pharmaceutical college in Guangdong to inspect its laboratories and chemical‑storage practices, reporters found the laboratory oversight to be deeply concerning. Around 10:30 a.m., on the first floor, several labs had both their front and back doors wide open, with no one present; some preparation rooms were similarly unoccupied. In one chemistry lab on the first floor, the door stood open, and hundreds of dark‑colored bottles and containers were arranged on the workbench, labeled with drug names and student identifiers, organized by specialty—such as polymer science or food safety. At approximately 11:00 a.m., inside the liquid chromatography room, a teacher was guiding dozens of students through an experiment. Nearby, a preparation room had its lights on, with chemicals laid out on the bench, yet not a single person was to be seen.

　　If the lack of regulatory awareness in laboratories can be addressed, can laboratory safety risks be entirely eliminated? For a long time, as hubs of scientific and technological research, laboratories have inevitably faced safety challenges alongside innovation. From a certain perspective, laboratory safety issues are an unavoidable risk inherent in scientific inquiry, and their existence is inevitable. However, through deliberate efforts, we can mitigate safety hazards, manage risks, reduce the likelihood of accidents, and minimize the scope and severity of injuries.

　　A Three-Pronged Approach to Preventing Laboratory Safety Issues

　　With the advancement of science and technology in China, the demand for laboratories of all types continues to grow, leading to the proliferation of key laboratories across schools, disciplines, and institutional systems. Consequently, laboratory safety must remain a constant priority.

　　First and foremost, we must completely eliminate human‑caused safety hazards. For example, laboratory doors left wide open without supervision, hazardous materials readily accessible, or junior students operating equipment on their own while instructors fail to provide adequate guidance and oversight—these lapses in safety management are major threats to laboratory safety and must be addressed as a top priority.

　　Secondly, weak safety awareness among faculty and students, coupled with inadequate safety education and training, represents a significant vulnerability. Reportedly, many university laboratories fail to conspicuously post essential safety management guidelines and student laboratory conduct rules; even when such documents are available, they often amount to little more than empty formalities, with virtually no one monitoring their implementation. It is imperative to conduct comprehensive laboratory safety education and provide targeted safety training—covering safe operating procedures and various emergency response measures—for faculty members, laboratory support staff, and students alike.

　　Finally, and requiring the coordinated efforts of other departments and institutions, universities are urged to integrate laboratory development into their overall institutional planning, thereby effectively advancing the professionalization and standardization of both laboratory infrastructure and comprehensive management. Insufficient investment in laboratory development has resulted in outdated facilities and obsolete equipment, creating significant safety risks.

　　[Postscript]

　　From a certain perspective, laboratory safety is also closely linked to the development of national competitiveness. The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed “implementing an innovation-driven development strategy.” Scientific research is a key engine for progress and an indispensable prerequisite for innovation, while laboratory safety serves as an essential safeguard for research activities. Therefore, the government should attach great importance to laboratory safety, clearly define its supervisory responsibilities, and urge enterprises and universities to conduct regular safety assessments and inspections.

　　The vitality of any system lies in its implementation, and the effectiveness of that implementation hinges on oversight. While refining the safety‑assessment mechanism, only by fostering a stronger culture of accountability among researchers, research institutions, government authorities, and the public can we ensure the system’s effective enforcement and address any potential gaps or vulnerabilities.