US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this feature | View comments | Email this feature | Printer-friendly version
News :: Environment : Organizing : Politics : Race : Social Welfare : Technology
Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
12 Nov 2004
Faneuil Hall was home to a public forum Wednesday night on the biosafety lab that is currently scheduled to be built in the South End's Boston Medical Center. The forum opened with a ten minute overview presented by Boston University officials, including Boston University Senior Vice President Richard J. Towle, which was interrupted by a woman demanding that the lab be referred to as the "proposed lab." After the somewhat contentious presentation was over, the hall became open for Bostonians to voice approval or disapproval about the proposed lab. Advocates and concerned citizens voiced their opinions, but drew no real conclusions, besides an agreement that the conflict is far from over. Attendees argued passionately for an open question and answer session with both sides of the conflict, and "more information and more respect" to be shown by Boston University towards concerned Boston residents.
Ten to fifteen of the people in attendance silently held up signs that read "Bioterrorism is not safe!" as the camera recording the event laid its lens upon them. A common concern voiced was that the proposed lab would be devoted to bio-terror, not public health. Those opposed felt that this lab was not going to be used as an advanced research center, but rather as a puppet for Homeland Security and the Bush Administration. Opponents argued that since the National Institute of Health (NIH) was given a counter-terrorism mandate for their site in Boston, the lab would be under control of the government when it came to what the lab would research and what information would be released. These citizens were concerned that the residents would be left in the dark when it came to information from the lab. As one woman put it, the lab is just a continuation of the country’s "policy of empire," which includes the unjustified war in Iraq. This remark drew a huge reaction from the crowd.

Some people were displeased with the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which showed that the worst case scenario of the lab would still cause minimal death and could be easily stopped. Scientists arguing against the lab stated their belief that the report’s worst case scenario was too simplistic and linear, and a real worse case scenario could only "be the work of Steven King." Other opponents did not see how this lab would even protect us from terrorist attacks if any were to occur. Since biological weapons like anthrax and the plague are hard to produce, the lab would be indirectly providing a source for terrorists to exploit. As one dumb-founded man put it, the lab would place America in "an arms-race against [itself]."

Some Bostonians voiced their support for the lab, echoing claims from BU's $27,000 public relations campaign that the lab would improve the economy, develop life-saving vaccines, and provide jobs and opportunities for local residents and students all over Boston. Challenging the logic behind some concerns about having a lab that studies diseases so close to a large, urban center, one women argued that such research has been conducted before without much problem, and anyone who is concerned is "a day late and a dollar short." Other supporters said that Boston is the perfect place for such a research lab because of the multitude of brilliant scientists in the Boston area. A BU scientist stated that he is the only person who should genuinely be worried about the safety of such a lab, because his office would only be "150 feet away from the lab." He believed that the potential scientific breakthroughs far out weigh the slim chance of an accident occurring.

An important issue that was somewhat overlooked was the socio-economic background of the proposed area of the biosafety lab. Using the 2000 census, Professor Patricia Hynes of Boston University showed in a report this April that the proposed neighborhoods of Dorchester and Roxbury are "the neighborhoods most burdened with environmental illness, social vulnerability, and disparities of health and income." One woman did bring up the fact that these neighborhoods are full of people of color, but that is as far as the issue went. Clearly the idea of environmental racism took a back seat to people’s concerns about the safety and true purpose of the lab.

This work is in the public domain.
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
12 Nov 2004
Mad ups to all the folks who made it there to voice their opposition. I went to an earlier, similar meeting, and frankly the process is a joke. But despite BU's blatantly racist attempts to plop this bioterror lab down in Roxbury/South End and despite the city government's urgent attempts to get people to shut up and accept it, people from the community are standing strong in their opposition to it.

I say if BU's millions of dollars are able to buy their way out of the political process that is supposed to protect residents from projects like this, then it's time for direct action to keep the residential communities of Boston free of Ebola virus.
Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
12 Nov 2004
you should replace "Biosafety" with "Bioterror" in the title of this article

Props to everyone who went to this! I couldn't make it unfourtunately.
Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
13 Nov 2004
BU's "blatent" racism?

Why do you assume Roxbury/South End isn't appropriate for a top research facility?

Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
13 Nov 2004
Roxbury/South End is not an appropriate location because it's a level 4 facility. Level 4 facilities deal with things like anthrax and Ebola virus. This is not an appropriate lab to put in a concentrated urban center. Comparable facilities in the United States are located in areas where the population density is extremely low (there is one other similar lab being built in an urban center, also in a community of color, which is no coincidence.) It is racist because they would never consider putting something so dangerous in a middle- or upper-class white neighborhood.

It is blatant racism and classism when a group consisting almost entirely of wealthy white men tells a community consisting mostly of working class people of color that they do not have a choice about what kind of facilities are appropriate to put in their neighborhood.
Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
16 Nov 2004
There are biolabs and a nuclear reactor at MIT. Nobody's whining about it being foisted on the white, middle-class neighborhoods around it.

Ever notice that the people protesting this don't actually live in the neighborhoods they are so righteously defending?

This is bullshit paternalism with a hint of racism. You're essentially working to keep high-paying, high-tech research jobs out of minority communities by using scare tactics.

"Keep ebola out of our communities!"

Great job, asshole.
Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
16 Nov 2004
Actually, one the groups spearheading the campaign against the the Bioterror lab is Alternatives for Community and Environment (ACE) ( ), an environmetal justice group based in Roxbury with strong roots in the community. It's not just a bunch of paternalistic outsiders--it's both community members and more privileged outsiders acting in solidarity (i.e., as equals).

As for the nuclear reactor at MIT, it was before my time, but my understanding is that that there were protests against it when it was first built--or perhaps they happened later. In any case, they were unsuccessful, although just barely. Activists almost passed a resolution that would have made Cambirdge a nuclear free zone, effectively making the reactor illegal. MIT threw a lot of money into the opposition campaign and managed to win. The activists involved, feeling like that was not a battle they could win, then moved onto other issues.
Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
17 Nov 2004
In any case, the neighborhoods surrounding MIT are at least as working class than middle-class, and are quite multiracial.

While they are certainly much more middle-class since the demise of rent control in the mid-90s, at the time of the fight against the reactor, they were solidly working-class.

In terms of threat-level, the bio work done at MIT is not Level 4. And the reactor is "subcritical"--meaning it cannot meltdown.

Still, if it were attacked with a sufficiently large bomb, it would like release a good deal of radiation, and everyone in Cambridge would be much happier if it were located out in the country somewhere.
Re: Tensions rise as BU inches closer to a Biosafety Lab in Boston
23 Nov 2004
Great Picture. I think the "Make a Wish" organization does a great job. Where can I donate?