Follow Us on Google
By Joshua Adeola-Oyekan and Stephanie O. Omoarebun
The incident that happened in Day by Day Laboratory, in Delta State reportedly registered under the Nigeria Institute of Science Laboratory Technology (NISLT), is still fresh in the mind and has triggered this article. The laboratory was sealed by the Medical Laboratory Science Council of Nigeria (MLSCN), but later unsealed by local representatives of the Association of Science Laboratory Technologists of Nigeria (ASLTON). The back-and-forth was followed by strongly worded statements, with accusations of intimidation and counter-claims of illegality.
As this unfolded, one truth became evident: the Nigerian public, the very people who rely on laboratories for health and life was dragged into unnecessary confusion created by unlawful jurisdictional overreach. For a country already struggling with fragile health systems, poor confidence in diagnostics, and rising medical tourism, the last thing we need is regulatory uncertainty. This is not about professional rivalry. It is about clarity, patient safety, and the credibility of Nigeria’s healthcare system.
Laboratories are not all the same. Some support agriculture by testing soil, water, and crops. Others serve industry by checking product standards. Some are educational, training future scientists. Still others are purely research-focused, advancing knowledge across fields.
But medical laboratories stand apart. They deal directly with human samples; blood, urine, tissues, swabs, and produce results on which over 70% of clinical decisions depend. The prescription of a doctor, the surgeon’s intervention and the midwife’s plan for delivery, are all guided by test results. A false negative HIV test, a wrongly reported blood group, or an inaccurate malaria diagnosis can be fatal.
Because of this unique role, countries around the world regulate medical laboratories with extraordinary care. This is not an accident, but due recognition that missteps in diagnostics cost lives.
Nigeria’s lawmakers, in their wisdom, created two distinct professional regulators in 2003: One, the Medical Laboratory Science Council of Nigeria (MLSCN), established by Act 11 of 2003, mandated to regulate medical laboratory science, including: accreditation of medical laboratories, registration of medical laboratory scientists, technicians, and assistants, regulation of laboratory practice for disease diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment. Two, the Nigeria Institute of Science Laboratory Technology (NISLT), established by Act 12 of 2003, mandated to regulate science laboratory technology across multiple sectors: education, industry, agriculture, research, and other non-medical areas.
These Acts are clear, complementary, and deliberately separated. The intent of the National Assembly was not duplication but division of labor. Just as the Council of Legal Education does not regulate engineers, and the Pharmacy Council does not regulate medical doctors, so also must NISLT not attempt to oversee medical laboratories.
Why the delta incident matters
When MLSCN sealed Day by Day Laboratory under its statutory mandate and NISLT affiliates attempted to counter this by unsealing the facility, the Nigerian public was left uncertain. Which body has the lawful authority to assure that results from such a laboratory are reliable and safe?
This is not a theoretical matter. Every day, Nigerians spend scarce resources on diagnostic tests. Many already doubt the reliability of results and travel abroad for second opinions. If unlawful encroachments into medical laboratory regulation persist, public confidence in Nigeria’s diagnostics will sink even lower. And when confidence is lost, patients suffer.
Nigeria is not alone in regulating laboratories, but we risk being an outlier if professional boundaries are ignored. In the United Kingdom, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) oversees clinical laboratories, while other scientific facilities are regulated separately. Again, in the United States: The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) regulates human diagnostic labs, while agricultural and industrial labs fall under different agencies; South Africa – the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) strictly regulates clinical laboratories and pathology, while technologists in other fields are governed elsewhere.
In every case, the principle is the same: medical diagnostics are regulated by a health-specific authority, not by general science councils. Nigeria cannot afford to deviate from this global norm.
Allowing unlawful claims of jurisdiction may appear to be professional noise, but the costs are grave. First are health costs because wrong results lead to wrong treatment. A misdiagnosis of cancer, diabetes, or infectious disease can cause irreversible harm or death. Secondly, you have economic costs – billions of naira are lost annually to medical tourism because Nigerians do not fully trust local diagnostics. Regulatory confusion only deepens this distrust. Social costs – in a situation where patients cannot distinguish between a properly accredited medical laboratory and a general science facility posing as one, confidence in the entire health system will collapse.
In the end, it is ordinary Nigerians – patients, families, and communities who pay the price of professional overreach. The Young Medical Laboratory Scientists Forum (YMLSF) believes that confrontation will not resolve this issue. Rather, clarity, collaboration, and respect for the law are needed to resolve the issue. We propose that there should be mutual respect of legal mandates, whereby the MLSCN continues to regulate medical laboratories as empowered by Act 11 of 2003, while NISLT confines itself to sectors as outlined in its Act 12 of 2003.
There should be legislative reinforcement. Where ambiguities exist, the National Assembly should revisit both Acts to tighten definitions and remove loopholes. Added to this is collaborative engagement, which would allow MLSCN and NISLT to cooperate on shared interests such as training in laboratory quality management systems or promoting research without NISLT overstepping into clinical diagnostics.
Public awareness campaigns are of vital importance in this regard. Nigerians must be empowered to ask: “Is this a medical laboratory accredited by MLSCN?” That single question can save lives.
Finally, it needs to recognized that at the heart of this issue is not a rivalry, but the safety of Nigerians. The law is clear: MLSCN is the sole statutory regulator of medical laboratories. NISLT’s attempt to extend itself into clinical diagnostics is an unlawful encroachment, not a legitimate dispute.
The path forward is simple: each body must remain within its statutory mandate. NISLT has an important role in education, agriculture, industry, and research. MLSCN has a life-saving responsibility in medical diagnostics. If both stay within their legal boundaries, Nigerians win. If encroachments persist, patients lose.
As the next generation of medical laboratory professionals, YMLSF is committed to clarity, professionalism, and patient safety above all. We stand ready to educate the public, support lawful regulation, and strengthen confidence in Nigeria’s healthcare system. It is time to silence distractions and focus on what truly matters: saving lives through credible, accurate, and trustworthy medical laboratory practice.
•Adeola-Oyekan Joshua and Stephanie O. Omoarebun, National President and National Secretary, respectively, Young Medical Laboratory Scientists Forum (YMLSF), wrote via email.
