Debate intensifies over London's biotech super-lab
U.K. prime minister Gordon Brown unveiled an ambitious project — a £500 million biolab facility next to the reopened St. Pancras station, which will house some 1,500 scientists who now work in several different labs; the project has its critics: London city hall wants low-income housing to be built on the site; some scientists argue that centralization of research is not good for science; and citizens worry about dangerous pathogens accidentally released in a populated area
Remember Ralph McTell’s 1974 song, “The Streets of London”? — Here is the chorus:
So how can you tell me you’re lonely / And say for you that the sun don’t shine? / Let me take you by the hand and lead you through the streets of London / I’ll show you something to make you change your mind.
What brings the streets of London to mind is a debate in the British capital echoing similar debates taking place in Boston and other American cities: Should a biomedical lab doing research on dangerous infectious diseases and defenses against bioterror be located in the middle of a bustling urban center?The debate is over an ambitious and controversial project which U.K. prime minister Gordon Brown unveiled last week when he announced the sale of a key central London site to a coalition composed of the government’s Medical Research Council (MRC), two medical charities, the Wellcome Trust and Cancer Research UK, and University College London (UCL). Next to the reopened St. Pancras station, which has high-speed rail links to the rest of Europe, the coalition plans to build a £500 million facility — £85 million for the land, about £350 million for the building, and the rest for equipment — which will house some 1,500 scientists, many of them from MRC’s celebrated National Institute for Medical Research (NIMR). “This is going to be great for British medical science, European medical science, and world medical science,” says UCL vice-provost Edward Byrne. There is no guarantee the project will live up to that promise, but Richard Lerner, president of the Scripps Research Institute in San Diego, California, says the effort does signify that the prime minister believes “biological science is important to the future of the country.”
Science’s John Travis writes (sub. req.) that to achieve Brown’s goal of improving the U.K. economy and the health of its citizens, the project will have to overcome major hurdles. London officials, who had designated the land for affordable housing, may try to stop it, as may those fearful of research on dangerous infectious pathogens being performed in central London near rail links to Europe. It is also not clear how the new center will blend labs from UCL, Cancer Research UK, and NIMR, which is being forced to close to the dismay of many of its scientists. “Making it a single entity rather than a collage of contrasting colors is a strong challenge,” says Frank Gannon,
