From my experience with microscopes in controlled airflow environments,
BSL-2 and BSL-3: Yes, it can be a bit like operating your instruments in
the inside of a vacuum cleaner. However, the things to take care of are
not just the extra sources of dust, but also static electricity. The
heavily filtered air often is rather dry, which creates good conditions
for the build-up of static electricity, and that usually increases the
amount of dust that sticks to samples, especially in plastic containers.
It can also interfere with the operation of instruments.

A nasty interference of biosafety with imaging equipment are powdered
gloves, which are easier to put on -- especially over another pair of
gloves, if that is required. But they usually have liberal amounts of
powder outside as well as inside, so everything people touch then looks
as if a team of mad forensic scientists has been dusting for
fingerprints.

Unrelated to dust: I have the habit of cleaning the oculars with the
anti-fog cleaning fluid that we are supplied with for our safety
glasses. Otherwise the oculars fog over quickly when I try to use a
microscope while wearing a surgical mask, because some of your breath
always escapes around your nose.

Emmanuel


-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: zondag 1 november 2009 22:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: New building options - feedback request from facilities NOT
located on ground floor/basement

Definitely a conflict of intent there!  All you can do is have a
filtered airlock in a situation like that, with heavy filtration in
the lab itself.  The bio-hazard requirements would have to take
precedence over the dust control requirements, but I would suppose it
could be implemented in a way to satisfy both needs.

Craig


On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Adrian Smith
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Positive pressure would seem to be problem if there potentially
biohazardous
> samples being imaged?
>
> Regards,
>
> Adrian
>