Error

A company can make research say whatever they want it to say. I don't buy "research" either. I buy results.

I can think of a good example of this sort of thing in the pharmaceutical market. St. John's Wort is an herb that has been used to treat depression and other mood problems for thousands of years. Hundreds of clinical trials in Europe have established St. John's Wort as the main ingredient of over 25% of all prescribed antidepressants. That's tough evidence to top.

Recently, when people started making a big stink about herbs, Pfizer did their own trials on St. John's Wort and found that it was "completely ineffective" for treating depression. This in the face of repeated research that suggested otherwise. Now, I think we all know that Pfizer (or any other company) has its own sales at the heart of its core research. And though they may or may not have bent the results, the point is that they were motivated to get the results that would've benefitted them the most, and they did. You can make research say whatever you want it to say. This is a sad fact in the "scientific" world of marketing products.

MiamiAG

Guys,

We all know about pharmaceutical companies, but are you that cynical about all commercial ventures?? Not all companies are run that way.

All I am saying is withhold your judgment until you are able to review the research done.

plantbrain

Art, I have an entire text book on the limnology of Humic waters...........
I just got out of the top grad program in perhaps the world on aquatic plants. I'm abreast in recent research, IFAS maintains the best datasbase for all things aquatic plant in the world.

I now work specifically with aquatic weeds for the state of CA.

A little literature search can pull up a lot of hits, what is really worth while and applicable is another story.

"Tom, we all thought very differently back then."

I was going against the grain since I first talked to Neil Frank before ever making a post on the web. I got into tangles with Karen, Neil, George and many others over things. I'll get into more for sure

" I call it the evolution of a hobby for the better. There are plants that do better with hard water, but there are those that do not. I can name various Crypts that prefer one side or the other. "

Start naming them
I've grown many so called soft water crypts and flowered them.
In hard water I might add.

Still have not found a hard water plant and I think it is very reasonable to make the statement that plants DO NOT "prefer/like otherwise enjoy" Soft Water.

Out of some 300 species, I've not found any that really do better or worse.
So if 99% are good with hard water, I am fine with this statement.

Yet, many companies still put forth many myths in the form "an aquatic plant perfers" this or that, yet they have no evidence to support the statement. Just because it's found there does not imply it prefers anything.

They also have not tested the statement to see if in fact their advice is true. That part does bother me because it continues so many of these myths and I try very hard to help others grow plants well and not get confused with all the extras.

So it does make me very passionate about myths and trying to stop them.
I want plants in everyone's tanks.

But in a way, so does Amano, Claus, Greg, Dupla etc.

Plants still need 3 basic things to grow well, you are not going to get away from that very much no matter what type of method you use.

You talk about unknowns, and variables, these can and should be accounted for, CO2, NO3, K, Traces, Light etc can be stabilized while you manipulate one dependant variable at a time, say PO4.

This is basic stuff.

You mentioned researchers, well how come none of them did that?
Tropica and SeaChem have done excellent jobs IMO.

I have little faith in companies that do not try this out or say they did research and not give credit to the hobbyist or person responsible for that research.

I spoke to Claus directly about the cable issue. That's what he said to me directly. This is not second hand talk. Most of the advances have come from hobbyist, not these companies in recent years(10-15).

I do not withhold judgement till the research is done, I actually do the research.

I find out for myself whether it works or seems reasonable.

I've done this for a long time now, I know fairly well what might have an impact and what might not. Many times things change my opinion and it does evolve. But there's only so much "EAC" can possibly do relative to say Flourish+a little peat to the filter etc.

If you find a significant difference and can verify it, you will be doing very very well even in a very controlled study.

Regards,
Tom Barr












As you know, there are those even today who use very different methods and still achieve excellent growth with little visible algae.

MiamiAG

Of that, there is no doubt, my friend.

I look forward to seeing you at AGA2004. I will convey information I receive from ADA on ECA, if any.

Of course, Jan and I will be most interested to hear more about your experience, if any, with C. affinis and C. cordata var. zonata. There is a long-standing belief that one plant does better in hard while the other in extremely soft water.

plantbrain

I'll be there

...but my point about ECA.
It's a trace mix, very tough when you start getting down to these products to show significant differences between product X vs Y.

Adding humics alone is not going to do that much, suppose the owner had some wood or added a little peat or used peat encrusted ADA substrate products?

Peat in terrestrial systems is another story, but in the water column it's quite another animal.

Saying "research" also is not something in and of it's self that's without critique.

How the data was obtained and applied etc makes all the world of difference.

I have an article on my desk I'm tearing into over their account of how many seeds are produced by a plant. They did good research and were able to account for it. Now I'm happy. I have confidence in their research and methods and if anyone asks, I'll know what to say about it.

Unless someone allows review of this, it's speculation to me.
So they can tout research till they are blue in the face, without showing the research, it really does not mean much and just a sales pitch to me.

I'm not asking for your dollars either.

Yes, I grew C affinis emergent.
I've never had C cordata var zonata, I've flowered several var of C cordata, not that one per se, but I've never had an issue with a crypt that was related to "hard" water either.

I'm sure there might be one out there, I've just not ran across it yet.
The ones I thought I did, I later found out I was wrong.

I have many failures to figure out what something is.
Then I rule out everything else.
So this way I know the other arguements and have explored them.

Still, 99% of all submersed plants do not prefer soft water, that I can say. I'll gladly leave a 1% for exceptions and wiggle room.


Regards,
Tom Barr