Tony,

I believe that culture conditions and test methodology are more realistic
sources of  apparent "resistance".  We should focus on standardizing these
aspects of the test rather than opening the Pandora's box of "phenol
resistance".  The five passage rule was put in place to ensure that cultures
remain genetically and physiologically pure (I'm sure than an extensive
scientific effort was undertaken to come up with 5, as oppose to 6 or 7
passages).

Warren

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony Cundell [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 4:54 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      [PMFLIST] Alternate to the Phenol Resistance Test
>
> The EPA is actively reviewing the elimination or modification of the
> Phenol Resistance Test as a requirement for the registration of
> disinfectants.
>
> The purpose of the test is control or verify the resistance of test
> organisms.
>
> The USP attempted to add such as test to the Antimicrobial Effectiveness
> test as a method of controlling the inherent variability of the test.
>
> Does anyone have an opinion as to the direction we should go with this
> issue?
>
> Tony Cundell
> Wyeth-Ayerst Pharmaceuticals
>
>
> ------------------
> The PMFList (http://microbiol.org/PMFList_info.htm) is operated from
> The Microbiology Network (http://microbiol.org) and supported by
> our sponsors (http://microbiol.org/sponsor.htm) as a service to
> the scientific community.
>
>


------------------
The PMFList (http://microbiol.org/PMFList_info.htm) is operated from
The Microbiology Network (http://microbiol.org) and supported by
our sponsors (http://microbiol.org/sponsor.htm) as a service to
the scientific community.