From the July 2006 Idaho Observer:

Are phenols safe to inject into our bodies via the TB test or vaccines?

Phenols are of known toxicity and their lethal limits have been established by science. The amount of phenol contained in the TB test as a preservative is small, but the substance is cumulative. To believe that it is okay to force phenol-containing TB tests on anyone is to believe it is okay to forcibly administer lethal poisons to people if it prolongs the shelf life of a pharmaceutical drug that has no medicinal value.

by Ingri Cassel

We have received many requests from prisoners, health care workers and teachers who have been told that they must have a tuberculosis (TB) skin test and would like to obtain more information from us in order to obtain a waiver from this invasive and dangerous medical test. With health care workers and teachers, persistence pays off. It is important to stand firm and not be intimidated by being fired over refusal to take this invasive and unnecessary test. Most employers will acquiesce in the face of a potential lawsuit, which would most likely be won by the plaintiff on several fronts, and they know it.

Prisoners, however, are caught in a difficult situation with regard to forced TB testing because they are confined in an environment where their most basic of human rights, like being denied informed consent and the right to refuse invasive/experimental medical procedures, are constantly violated without recourse.

After sending out a package of information to Donald Jackman on the most common TB test, Tubersol, which contains phenol as a preservative, he sent me several pages on phenol from the New Encyclopedia Britannica (15th edition, 1989). Following are some excerpts of this information:

Phenols have antiseptic and germicidal properties, which increase to a maximum as the length of an alkyl side-chain substituent reaches about six carbon atoms. The lowest member, phenol, is highly toxic and caustic, but these properties progressively diminish with the higher members of the series. Polyhydric phenols are still markedly toxic but less caustic than the monohydric compounds [such as phenol.]

Occurrence and preparation. So-called "natural" phenol is obtained by the destructive distillation of coal or from wood tar although it also can be obtained from petroleum and from organic matter of vegetable origin. Other phenols of truly natural origin (that is not dependent upon chemical transformation) are found in essential oils, particularly thymol and carvacrol. Phenol itself was first obtained from coal tar in 1834 by the German chemist Friedlieb Ferdinand Runge and called carbolic acid. The French chemist Auguste Laurent in 1841 produced the pure compound from coal tar and named it phenic acid. Although coal tar represented the major source of phenol before World War I, the great use of phenol in plastics spurred the use of synthetic methods of production, with the result that by the mid-1960s over 95 percent of the phenol produced was of synthetic origin. Three general procedures are used for synthesis, each of which utilizes benzene as a starting material; the methods are: sulfonation, chlorination, and alkylation with propylene (which leads to cumene, or isopropylbenzene, as the first intermediate.)

Biological and medical properties. The antiseptic activity of phenol is a property that accounts for much of its industrial utilization. In dilute solutions (of 1 to 2 percent) it also finds application as an agent for combating itching of the skin. Undiluted phenol is highly corrosive to mucous membranes and skin, and it is considered a nerve poison. It may enter the human system by many methods, including absorption by skin, oral ingestion, and vapour inhalation. Phenol and the three cresol isomers are of about the same order of toxicity and produce identical symptoms in poisoned animals.

The lethal dose of phenol for adults has been estimated at 10 to 15 grams (0.32 to 0.48 ounces) orally and less when absorbed from body cavities or mucous membranes. Systemic toxicity of ingested phenol depends on the absolute amount consumed. Continuous exposure even to low levels may cause chronic poisoning. A safe allowed concentration of phenol vapour in air for an eight-hour exposure is 5 parts per million. The metabolic effects of phenol are not well-known.

Industrial applications. In the 19th century, phenol was used extensively as an antiseptic, and the term "phenol coefficient" is widely used as a measure of the relative strength of disinfectants. Due to its irritating effects on humans, the use of phenol has been largely discontinued for general antisepsis. Higher-molecular-weight homologues and derivatives of phenol have supplanted phenol itself in the areas of germicidal cleaning.

World War I created a large demand for phenol as a starting material for the production of a trinitro derivative, picric acid, which was used extensively as an explosive. In the 1930s the expanding plastics industry began to require large amounts of phenol for the Bakelite-type resins, and this usage expanded to the point in the 1950s where it consumed about 70 percent of total phenol production. From the 1960s onward this use fell significantly.

The chemical and pharmaceutical industries are large users of phenol for conversion to many different products. The salicylates (carboxyphenols) are starting materials for the preparation of aspirin, dyes, and flavours. Chlorophenols and their derivatives find application as fungicides, bactericides, and selective weed killers. Alkyl phenols produce an important group of synthetic tanning agents, and triphenyl phosphate is a plasticizer for cellulose acetate film. Large quantities of phenol are converted to cyclohexanol, which is converted eventually to nylon, and to bisphenol-A, used in the production of epoxy resins. [End quote]

Aside from Tubersol containing phenol as a preservative, the vaccines Pneumovax (Pneumococcal), Typhim Vi (Typhoid), and DryVax (vaccinia) also contain phenol as a preservative and anti-bacterial agent.

A 23-page document called "Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary" lists all the various additives to vaccines and their known toxicity profiles and can be found online at this weblink http://users.adelphia.net/~cdc/MSDSwithVaxInsertInfo.pdf

Under the listing for Phenol, the following part of the toxicology profile is bolded:

This material is a systemic poison and constitutes a serious health hazard. The risks of using it in the laboratory must be fully assessed before work begins. Vesicant [produces blisters]. TVL [threshold limit value] 5 ppm. Acute poisoning by ingestion, inhalation or skin contact may lead to death. Phenol is readily absorbed through the skin.

It is important to note that other common additives to vaccines are also listed along with their toxicity profiles. Some of these added ingredients are formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, EDTA, thimerosal (ethyl mercury), hydrochloric acid, neomycin, silicon, 2 phenoxyethanol, polysorbate 80, and octoxynol-9 (a spermicide).

If you were told that a product containing phenol (and other known toxins), even in small amounts, must be injected into your body as a prerequisite for attending school or becoming gainfully employed, would you challenge this requirement on the grounds that such a requirement is not legal and is a form of medical experimentation? It is vitally important that these requirements be challenged, especially in the face of non-invasive alternatives. (See The Idaho Observer, July 2005, "Alternatives to TB Testing".)

After reading Dr. Sherri Tenpenny’s well-researched book, Fowl! Bird Flu It’s Not What You Think, where she links the dioxin in the herbicides used in the Vietnam War to the recent outbreaks of Avian flu, and the past "Spanish Flu" pandemic of 1918 to World War I bombs using mustard gas, one has to wonder if the large amounts of phenol used during World War I may have also contributed to the 1918 flu pandemic. Now that the chemical age has saturated the planet with toxic chemicals and we are experiencing an explosion of cancers and autoimmune diseases, it would certainly be wise to avoid injecting even more chemicals into our toxin-overburdened bodies.