Reviews the RHIC-era strangelet/black-hole catastrophe scenarios and the Busza–Jaffe–Sandweiss–Wilczek safety review, and argues the review process exhibited institutional bias: the reviewing committee was appointed by and reported to the same laboratory with a strong interest in proceeding, deliberated largely in private, and (in Calogero’s reading) was more oriented toward producing a public-relations-adequate reassurance than toward open adversarial scrutiny. Calogero does not conclude the collisions are actually dangerous; he concludes the safety-review process itself lacked the independence and transparency that a genuinely existential (if low-probability) risk claim warrants, and calls for a more procedurally robust review mechanism for future high-energy experiments. relevance_note: An early, RHIC-era instance of the “the institution investigating itself” objection that recurs against LSAG at the LHC — a process critique distinct from the physics or legal ones.