On this page
Many of the safety rules in a chemistry lab can seem fussy: the specific type of glove, the lab coat on a warm day, the risk assessment for a “small” reaction. Almost every one of them exists because somebody, somewhere, was hurt. This article tells a few of those stories, not to shock, but because each one carries a lesson that makes the rule make sense. The people involved were skilled, careful chemists. That’s the point: accidents don’t only happen to the careless.
Robert Bunsen and cacodyl (1840s)
Long before he gave his name to the laboratory burner, the German chemist Robert Bunsen studied cacodyl compounds: foul-smelling, poisonous organic compounds of arsenic, some of which ignite spontaneously in air. He worked on them for years, and suffered arsenic poisoning along the way. In 1843, an explosion involving cacodyl cyanide shattered his mask and cost him the sight of one eye.
The lesson: protect your eyes and control exposure. Bunsen’s era had no fume cupboards as we know them and no safety glasses. Today, eye protection is non-negotiable in any lab where chemicals are used, and toxic volatile substances are handled only with engineering controls such as a fume cupboard. Bunsen himself went on to much safer and hugely productive work in spectroscopy, helping discover caesium and rubidium through their emission spectra.
Karen Wetterhahn and dimethylmercury (1996–1997)
Karen Wetterhahn was a respected professor at Dartmouth College in the United States, an expert on how toxic metals affect living cells. In August 1996, while transferring a small amount of dimethylmercury, a very toxic, volatile liquid, she spilled one or a few drops onto her gloved hand. She was wearing the latex gloves that were standard at the time, and working in a fume hood.
Months later, she developed neurological symptoms. Tests showed extremely high mercury levels. Later testing found that dimethylmercury can pass through latex gloves in seconds. Despite treatment, she died in June 1997.
The lessons:
- Glove choice matters. No glove is a universal barrier. Different materials resist different chemicals, and manufacturers publish permeation data. For highly toxic substances, laminated gloves (often under an outer glove) are used. Always check the safety data sheet.
- Ask whether a dangerous chemical is needed at all. After this case, the use of dimethylmercury was strongly discouraged, and safer alternatives were recommended wherever possible.
Wetterhahn’s colleagues and family established programmes in her name, and her case is taught in chemical safety courses worldwide.
Sheri Sangji and tert-butyllithium (2008–2009)
Sheharbano “Sheri” Sangji was a 23-year-old research assistant at the University of California, Los Angeles. In December 2008, she was using a plastic syringe to transfer tert-butyllithium, a reagent that is pyrophoric: it ignites spontaneously on contact with air. The syringe plunger came out, the reagent spilled and caught fire, and her clothing, a synthetic sweater, ignited. She was not wearing a lab coat. She died from her burns about eighteen days later.
The lessons:
- Lab coats matter, and for work with flammable or pyrophoric materials, flame-resistant lab coats should be used. Synthetic clothing can melt and stick to skin.
- Training and supervision matter. Handling pyrophoric reagents requires specific techniques and the right equipment (such as syringes of the correct size, or cannula transfer), learned under supervision.
- Emergency response: know where the safety shower is and how to use it.
The case led to significant changes in laboratory safety rules and training at universities in the US and beyond, and to legal action that emphasised institutional responsibility for safety.
The Texas Tech explosion (2010)
In January 2010, a graduate student at Texas Tech University was preparing a nickel hydrazine perchlorate compound, an energetic (explosive) material being studied for research. Previous work had used about 100 mg. The student made around 10 g, a hundred times more, reportedly to reduce the number of batches. While the student was grinding the material with a mortar and pestle, it exploded, causing serious injuries to the hands and an eye.
The US Chemical Safety Board investigated and highlighted problems common to academic labs: limits on quantities weren’t clearly set or enforced, hazards weren’t formally assessed, and near-misses weren’t systematically recorded.
The lessons:
- Scale-up changes risk. Doubling a quantity can more than double the hazard, especially with energetic or exothermic reactions, where heat builds up faster than it can escape.
- Risk assessment before every change, not just before a new experiment. See risk assessment in chemistry.
- Report near-misses. Every small incident is a free warning.
Why case studies work
Safety training that only lists rules is easy to forget. A real case attaches each rule to a person, a date and a consequence, which makes it far more memorable. That’s why investigation reports from bodies such as the US Chemical Safety Board are widely used in teaching: they describe not only what went wrong on the day, but the chain of decisions, assumptions and missing checks that made the accident possible. Reading one is a valuable exercise for any chemistry student.
Common threads
Looking across these and many other incidents, the same themes appear:
| Theme | Lesson |
|---|---|
| Unfamiliar hazards | Read the safety data sheet every time, even for “routine” chemicals. |
| Wrong protective equipment | Choose PPE for the specific hazard: eye protection type, glove material, flame-resistant coat. |
| Scale-up | Re-assess risk whenever quantities or conditions change. |
| Working alone | Have someone nearby who can help in an emergency. |
| Normalised shortcuts | “We’ve always done it this way” isn’t a safety argument. |
| Poor reporting | Near-misses must be recorded and learned from. |
What this means in a school lab
School labs use far less hazardous chemicals, in smaller quantities, under closer supervision. But the lessons scale down:
- Eye protection whenever chemicals or heating are involved.
- Tie back long hair and keep flammable materials away from flames.
- Follow the method exactly; never scale up or substitute chemicals without the teacher’s approval.
- Report every spill, breakage and “that was a bit close” moment.
- Know where the eyewash, fire blanket and exits are.
See lab safety rules and hazard symbols.
Safety culture: the bigger picture
Modern safety thinking focuses less on blaming individuals and more on systems: good training, clear procedures, the right equipment, supervision, and a culture where anyone can say “stop, this doesn’t look right” without fear. Many universities and companies now publish investigations into their incidents so that others can learn. The chemists in these stories are remembered partly through the safer practices their cases inspired.
Key takeaways
- Serious lab accidents have happened to skilled, experienced chemists.
- Bunsen’s injury shows why eye protection and exposure control matter.
- Wetterhahn’s death showed that gloves must be chosen for the specific chemical.
- Sangji’s death led to stronger rules on lab coats, training and handling pyrophoric reagents.
- The Texas Tech explosion showed the dangers of unassessed scale-up.
- Safety rules are lessons learned; a strong safety culture encourages questions and reports near-misses.
Advertisement