# The science behind ADA additives



## Morgan Freeman

Penac, Tourmalne etc.  What's the science behind it? Are there any tests to see how exactly they improve plant growth?

They all seem rather expensive to do a job that would ideally be covered by a good substrate, no?


----------



## Mark Evans

cant wait for the reply to this one.


----------



## Garuf

There's not really any, there was a huge post on the barr report with a full break down, they're little more than snake oil. 
Tourmaline is a mineral and non-soluable and offers no benefits.
Penac are pumice stones with a very low cec, so low infact that it could be called negligable and dried organic matter, both have no benefits.
There's many more but my account on barr report has expired and as such I can't read it, with any luck Tom himself will chime in with the full break down and their relative usefulness. 

What ever the case, it's safe to say they're not needed and are nothing but a waste of money.


----------



## flyingfish

What do you need the in your substrate out of the ADA system?


----------



## ceg4048

flyingfish said:
			
		

> What do you need the in your substrate out of the ADA system?


Well, if you had to take a guess, wouldn't it be any of the the products that contain significant quantities of NPK+Traces? Isn't the answer to these questions always the same? Start with Aquasoil Amazonia. It contains extremely high levels of  NPK+Traces and this is one of the things that make it such an excellent choice for both low tech and high tech tanks. On top of that factor, there is an ergonomic factor. This substrate is fabulous on the hands with a velvet feel unmatched by most. This sediment also has a high retention of nutrients, simply because it's a clay product. If you dose the water column as well then this gives an even longer endurance. This is the product that does the lion's share of the work within this system. I don't think there is any secret with regard to that.

Some also prefer to add the Powersand which is also high in NPK, but whose nutrient retention is very low, petering out after a month or so. After these two, you'll be hard pressed to find significant improvement in performance with any of the plethora of other products in the system.

Few bother to actually test the performance of each component being offered. If there are say, 10 sediment products that comprise the system, then at a minimum you'd need to set up 10 identical tanks, one tank with all 10, another with 9 and so forth. At the end of a certain time period the plants would be collected and their total dry weight, root dry weight and stem dry weight would be measured and compared. One might even want to test various combinations of the products. This is all very tedious and expensive so either the consumer goes whole hog and buys everything or is more frugal and just gets the very basic necessities. It just depends on your budget and on your dependence on "cachet".

Cheers,


----------



## Morgan Freeman

flyingfish said:
			
		

> What do you need the in your substrate out of the ADA system?



Nothing, I couldn't see the reason to add anything other than the standard plant substrate. Just ordered a 3L bag of Amazonia 2, I was just interested to know if there were any good reasons to effectively triple the amount I was paying with extras. If I were paying that much I'd want some pretty concrete guarantees that this stuff is worth it.

Maybe it's my Yorkshire blood


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,
I must admit I'm a sceptic as well. As Clive says to scientifically test every new product is impossible for the home aquarist, and even in fully replicated "identical systems" you can only really test a maximum of 2 independent variables at the same time. As a bare minimum you need 6 replicates for any one treatment and the number of tanks required pretty soon become truly astronomical.  

My approach is to look a the claims made for products where I'm fairly confident about my level of expertise and experience. Therefore as soon as light manufacturers start talking about "special phosphors" etc for the fluorescent tubes that they are selling at 3 or 4 times the going rate, my own personal bullsh*t meter comes into operation.

When I came back to fish-keeping I found that for the areas that I was familiar with (from my work with hydroponics and waste water treatment) the only explanation, for some of the claims made by certain manufacturers, was that they were engaged in a competition to find who could tell the most outrageous lie and get away with it. 

cheers Darrel


----------



## Morgan Freeman

Well you wouldn't need to test every additive individually if you only wanted a general idea.

One set up with substrate only, one set up with all the additives. You'd only need to do further testing should the identical set up plus additives prove to result in greater/improved plant growth. If they prove to be just the same, no further testing required.

But still, pretty ££££. 

A sceptic I shall remain, thanks for all the replies.


----------



## Ian Holdich

those white pots will come in handy though.


----------



## Morgan Freeman

Good place to put your balls when your OH finds out how much you spent.


----------



## Ian Holdich

I have just had a look at how much these products cost!

*OMG* thats a lot of money for some dust.


----------



## Garuf

Exactly. I've been searching but with no avail to find the break downs of the additional "vital" ingredients but can't for the life of me find the blog I'd seen them on. 
It really bothers me that these products are peddled as being vital to producing a beautiful tank when the reality of it is that you just don't, they're little more than new ager, pseudo-science non-sense, the people who are adamant you do are often sucked into the marketing and respond with the same feverishly religious response as people who buy into apples marketing scheme or religion itself and accuse you of bashing their beloved company rather than accepting that though some products are good, a lot are bad, and though some aspects of the ideology are good, others too, are just as dogmatically wrong as dupla, dennerle or jbls were 30,20 or 10 years ago. The only difference being now is that we understand plants needs, we understand the mechanisms at play and we know exactly what's needed and not through quantitative, scientific testing yet this common sense is shrouded out by market leaders promoting the use of snake oil treatments and fraudulent claims.


----------



## Mark Evans

So, if these products done work,...and some say they dont.

 Could you explain the, when people set up tanks with just...let's say...plain old ADA amazonia or columbo for instance, the tank fails...which I've seen on occasion's...does this then mean ADA amazonia is all 'Hype' and doesn't work? 

Surely the proof, for me at least is in every single Aquajournal, ADA Nature aqrium gallery tank, online images of Amano tanks....Mmmm...maybe it doesnt work


----------



## Garuf

I would suggest the tanks fail for a myriad of reasons and certainly not because you chose not to kneel at the alter of amano, normally poor husbandry ailed with too much light or some other element that must be at play, that and most people don't have a small army of people meticulously manicuring their tanks daily either, do they?!

The "proof" you provide is sadly purely anecdotal, you're buying into their patter, if a product does nothing detrimental then it's presence will not inhibit a good show, correct? You simply can't say "because they used this it must work" That's not how these things work, if we can prove it does nothing then it doesn't belong there and it's presence meaning a success can simply be ruled out, it's that simple. If the product was small ceramic horses would you buy into it then?! The systems you idolize and have rolled out as proof are simply not comparable systems in the way we run our tanks because they have a regime that we do not adhere to as a general rule, identical, sucessful systems exist without amanos magic dust, how do they work if you need to spend on a mineral that's cations aren't even able to release in water nor posses any benefit to the plants? 

You also simply can't say "well x product wasn't present that's why you failed", that's as poor a statement to make too, because it's absence means nothing if it does nothing, the failure of the system therefore must be some other element because it can be isolated as not having any role within the system nor with it's downfall. 

If it's as simply as pointing at a system and saying it works because x is present then I'm going to start selling my own snake oil ceramic horses for people to needlessly shell out on and claim that they're vital, it costs nothing to question why you're really doing something.


----------



## Morgan Freeman

Mark Evans said:
			
		

> Surely the proof, for me at least is in every single Aquajournal, ADA Nature aqrium gallery tank, online images of Amano tanks....Mmmm...maybe it doesnt work



That's proof of good filtration, correct lighting, flow, co2 and meeting the nutrient requirements of the plants. If ADA substrate meets all the NPK requirements and the fert regime provides the right amount of NPK plus micros via the water column, what else is needed? I understand I'm very new to this, so I'm willing to admit the possibility of being wrong.


----------



## Garuf

You forgot co2 but essentially you're right. There's also extremely low levels of organic matter in an ada tank too which also helps, low stockings, tubing is cleaned daily as are lily pipes, the filters bi-weekly, low levels of light mean lower demand and less chance of algae, large water changes daily, the glass cleaned daily... Like I say, manicured in ways our tanks just aren't.


----------



## viktorlantos

I guess the main issue here is the cost, that's why many guys could not test them at home. However only a minor ammount needed from each. Would be ideal from ADA to have a starter package for 45P, 60P, 90P, 120P tanks. As most of these additives has enough content for 10+ tanks.

For example: To test Penac additives on your 60P tank you only need 6gramms (3 spoon) of Penac not 200g as the product has. This also means that the volume you add to your tank just to play the ADA way is really a small investment. Unfortunatelly you can't get smaller amount, but you get the idea.


----------



## Garuf

It's not so much the cost, it's more that it's a product marketed as vital when the reality of the matter is that it's simply not, it's highly misleading and it gives fan boys the idea that because other people don't use such and such's products that the over all outcome must be inferior or that any issues are instantly down to your choice in magic powders, rather than more correctly aligning issues to poor husbandry.


----------



## George Farmer

Garuf said:
			
		

> ... it gives fan boys the idea that because other people don't use such and such's products that the over all outcome must be inferior or that any issues are instantly down to your choice in magic powders, rather than more correctly aligning issues to poor husbandry.


Have you seen evidence of this on UKAPS, Gareth?

I'd like to think not, and that the vast majority of the UKAPS community are aware, through the highly constructive posts from the likes of Tom Barr, Clive, and your good-self, equivalent results can be achieved using non-ADA products combined with appropriate maintenance etc.

The truth is we'll never know if the Penac powders etc. make any real difference without proper experiments.  

I remain open-minded.

I was very impressed when I used the entire ADA system a couple of years ago, but I will never know _for certain_ if I would have achieved as impressive growth using other products.


----------



## NeilW

Even if these products only work on a placebo level then surely they've still justified their value/cost to the people who have bought into them? 

I have no issues with the 'evil marketing' of ADA as the products themselves are all luxury goods to begin with that people choose to buy for their own hobby and enjoyment. You take it or leave it


----------



## plantbrain

Morgan Freeman said:
			
		

> Penac, Tourmalne etc.  What's the science behind it? Are there any tests to see how exactly they improve plant growth?
> 
> They all seem rather expensive to do a job that would ideally be covered by a good substrate, no?



There ain't no Science behind, it's quack, whack and hokey spiritual hobo mish mash and rubbish.

Critical thinking: use it. :idea: 

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

viktorlantos said:
			
		

> I guess the main issue here is the cost, that's why many guys could not test them at home. However only a minor ammount needed from each. Would be ideal from ADA to have a starter package for 45P, 60P, 90P, 120P tanks. As most of these additives has enough content for 10+ tanks.
> 
> For example: To test Penac additives on your 60P tank you only need 6gramms (3 spoon) of Penac not 200g as the product has. This also means that the volume you add to your tank just to play the ADA way is really a small investment. Unfortunatelly you can't get smaller amount, but you get the idea.



You state that they are needed and only in small amounts, please describe specifically what you mean by needed and what is provided specifically by these products. 

I've challenge Amano on this stuff. He made a joke about them. Another group ask him, he stated that the marketing guys at ADA told him to sell the stuff, they are NOT needed.

This is from Amano himself.

I can find no factual support of any sort for plants or hydric soil research in any journal for any of these. Penac is a "known quack".

You'll have to do better than saying it and belief.

Homeopathic quackery products make billions $$ every year, I'd greatly prefer they not enter the aquarium market and will attack them *with extreme prejudice*. This is not personal, it's based on poor logic and often times outright crookedness and marketing scams, not products that offer any real help.

These are two good examples.

Send me your money instead, I'll tell you nice things.  

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## viktorlantos

plantbrain said:
			
		

> You state that they are needed and only in small amounts, please describe specifically what you mean by needed and what is provided specifically by these products.



I meant if anyone wants to follow the ADA way the requred amount based on their setup is only a few gramms from each stuff. So whoever wants to give it a try and can get a portion too it's not a big investment to make a personal test.


----------



## plantbrain

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Garuf said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to think not, and that the vast majority of the UKAPS community are aware, through the highly constructive posts from the likes of Tom Barr, Clive, and your good-self, equivalent results can be achieved using non-ADA products combined with appropriate maintenance etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The truth is we'll never know if the Penac powders etc. make any real difference without proper experiments.
> I remain open-minded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is where you took and right turn and should have kept going straight.
> Open minded is fine, sounds nice and good an all..........they have done proper experiments with the Penac line in agriculture and in aquaculture.
> 
> It's quackery.
> No self respecting researcher would believe their claims.
> 
> Now if they could show several researchers say in Aquatic Botany journal, that showed it does as claimed........then *I'd happily eat my words.
> *
> 
> I've seen this nit wit marketing and "well, we cannot really tell, maybe it works, I'll be open minded and buy it"
> 101 times in my 30 odd plus years in the hobby. I've NEVER once had to eat my words on this. I'm not a betting man, but I'd bet the home on this.
> 
> It's out right homeopathic crazy talk. I'll remain highly skeptical, extremely so...........till proven otherwise. Screw the open minded niceties. The burdern of proof is upon them when they talk this rubbish. Amano even states it's not needed and something his marketing guys told him to add and use.
> 
> He sells it, but at least he's honest about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was very impressed when I used the entire ADA system a couple of years ago, but I will never know _for certain_ if I would have achieved as impressive growth using other products.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


So test it and see :idea:  Then you'll have some degree of experience and will know. However, even if the tank does not do as good as the full line up, perhaps it was the CO2 or some other variable? Hard to say, so you cannot use that as a basis either. If the aquarium does better..........without the snake oil.........then what? Same thing.
You cannot really say.

the best way would to place plants in pots in the same tank with different media in each pot, then measure growth rates, leaf size/area and the root and shoot dry weights, N and P and total carbon in the tissues. This is something a hobbyist can do except for the N and P tissue, which is not that $$$ at a lab to have done.

Most ADA fan boys? 
Do any testing and experimentation like this?
hahaha, hehehe..........nope, they do not care, they just want to scape.
Nothing wrong with that, but if you have a belief system rather than healthy large dose of skepticism and curiosity........critical thinking.........then you do not get to say much, all you can do is show off the nice tank and spend more $$$ to do it.

ADA's marketing team knows this and this is why they offer such additional items that offer little and prey upon belief and perceptions. I question my own belief and I question Amano's beliefs as well(Is Amano susceptible to belief?) When you put someone up beyond this, you enter into dangerous territory.  I'm not comfy doing that, and if I piss off a legion of ADA fan boys/girls, then so be it. That does not scare me one bit. I can support my arguments and skepticism, question is......can ADA and can the fan boys/girls?

Not that I have ever seen to date, same with the Dupla fan boys/girls of 20 years ago.
Same tired rehashed weak minded arguments and personal poo pooing of the one questioning their Gods.
These same argument and approaches to the debate have never changed (This alone should tell you something).
And these same approaches are not confined to this hobby either, diet pills, alternative medicines, water filters, work out routines.........you name it.


----------



## plantbrain

viktorlantos said:
			
		

> plantbrain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You state that they are needed and only in small amounts, please describe specifically what you mean by needed and what is provided specifically by these products.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I meant if anyone wants to follow the ADA way the requred amount based on their setup is only a few gramms from each stuff. So whoever wants to give it a try and can get a portion too it's not a big investment to make a personal test.
Click to expand...


That's fair then.

So *how* would you set up a test and if the results showed differences, what would that mean?
Either negative or positive or neutral ??

Methods are critical there.


----------



## George Farmer

plantbrain said:
			
		

> I've challenge Amano on this stuff. He made a joke about them. Another group ask him, he stated that the marketing guys at ADA told him to sell the stuff, they are NOT needed.
> 
> This is from Amano himself.


Was this just the Penac?


----------



## viktorlantos

plantbrain said:
			
		

> I've challenge Amano on this stuff. He made a joke about them. Another group ask him, he stated that the marketing guys at ADA told him to sell the stuff, they are NOT needed.
> This is from Amano himself.



Well i do not think this would be the truth. I can imagine he answered this to you, but it was more of a conflict handling, friendly way to say so. Not sure in which situation you had this talk with him, but i've seen this question on other seminars too. Last time on Malaysia Seminar. So he just put this question on the side without going into any explanation with you   

I think to smooth the edge of the "ADA system thing" he built something to his speach. That this stuff is not required, but using them gives a better result. This was from Mr. Amano too. Same for their PowerSand substrate under Amazonia.

To say that the marketing dep asked him to use is kind of a joke i guess. To show him like anyone else from us. Nothing more. He did this with one of his tool too on his speach. But they still using their tanks this way.

Anyway i am not defending anything here, it's just something which i woud not take serious even if Mr. Amano told this to you.



			
				plantbrain said:
			
		

> So how would you set up a test and if the results showed differences, what would that mean?
> Either negative or positive or neutral ??



Good question, but i do not think i could test it simply. Only in different tanks or vases or so. So i would test it in fully separate environment. But since i am more connected to the art side of aquascaping and less on the science i just give it a try on any of my setup. FYI we used it on our tank before. The tank performing awesome, but as you said i would be too hard to tell if any of these things did this (or added to this) or we just found the perfect balance of that tank and plants.

To many variables everywhere. Just like with ferts, soils, light, filtrations etc. Use it, test it and you can decide if this add anything to your scapes or not. Or just skip it and live without them.

I still see too many folks going with the best substrates like Amazonia and they could not even keep a plant or have a tank without massive algae field. Of course for them a prof soil is a waste of money in this situation.


----------



## Radik

viktorlantos said:
			
		

> plantbrain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You state that they are needed and only in small amounts, please describe specifically what you mean by needed and what is provided specifically by these products.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I meant if anyone wants to follow the ADA way the requred amount based on their setup is only a few gramms from each stuff. So whoever wants to give it a try and can get a portion too it's not a big investment to make a personal test.
Click to expand...


Why to bother when it is fake? All they do is pollute planet with useless crap with no benefit to anybody except them self.


----------



## foxfish

I do enjoy this type of debate - a bunch of experts talking about something I dont quite understand but makes compulsive reading .....


----------



## GreenNeedle

> Well i do not think this would be the truth. I can imagine he answered this to you, but it was more of a conflict handling, friendly way to say so. Not sure in which situation you had this talk with him, but i've seen this question on other seminars too. Last time on Malaysia Seminar. So he just put this question on the side without going into any explanation with you
> 
> I think to smooth the edge of the "ADA system thing" he built something to his speach. That this stuff is not required, but using them gives a better result. This was from Mr. Amano too. Same for their PowerSand substrate under Amazonia.
> 
> To say that the marketing dep asked him to use is kind of a joke i guess. To show him like anyone else from us. Nothing more. He did this with one of his tool too on his speach. But they still using their tanks this way.



I wouldn't be so sure Viktor. POwersand is an old product before AS and rather than remove it once AS came along they marketed it as complimenatary to AS.  Thats an old argument though.

Also Amano freely admits he uses low light and rather than ADA lights upsetting the highlight crowd they somehow reign the output in so that it is much lower than you would expect frm th ctua wattage  This was shown in the tests at AFA a couple of years ago where the ADA MHs were giving half or less the PAR you would expect from other similr wattage MH.  However it means th AD MH = less algae.  People don't know its down to its inefficiency and still pay loads more for it.

So I think Amano could well have been serious r.e. his comments above.  Much as Michael O Leary will laugh and joke about how poor his flights are and agree that all the add ons are a racket.  This is face to face with cameras and on news bulletins.  He doesn't worry about it and says at the end of the 'interview' that Ryanair passenger numbers aren't dropping 

AC


----------



## Morgan Freeman

plantbrain said:
			
		

> Critical thinking: use it. :idea:
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr



Hence the thread   

Anyway, if it was my company selling these, I'd test them myself and publish the results for all to see. I'm sure I'd have enough money to do so after selling £300 desk lamps


----------



## Garuf

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Garuf said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... it gives fan boys the idea that because other people don't use such and such's products that the over all outcome must be inferior or that any issues are instantly down to your choice in magic powders, rather than more correctly aligning issues to poor husbandry.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you seen evidence of this on UKAPS, Gareth?
> 
> I'd like to think not, and that the vast majority of the UKAPS community are aware, through the highly constructive posts from the likes of Tom Barr, Clive, and your good-self, equivalent results can be achieved using non-ADA products combined with appropriate maintenance etc.
> 
> The truth is we'll never know if the Penac powders etc. make any real difference without proper experiments.
> 
> I remain open-minded.
> 
> I was very impressed when I used the entire ADA system a couple of years ago, but I will never know _for certain_ if I would have achieved as impressive growth using other products.
Click to expand...


No, George, I've not noticed it as vehemently as it is on other forums but it's definitely sneaking in, it got so bad on other forums that if you didn't have ada in the title then you wouldn't get any views at all let alone comments! It's definitely sneaking in now we have the full ada ranges on tap and I'd be extremely sad to see it go that way, not after the loss of James c recently and Maz Maslain. 

I've heard all these tales of Amano being a salesman before he's a hobbyist, he told one of the russian judges he only makes his tanks available in book form because people will pay money for them, for example. 

And, Tom, thank you for adding some much needed reasoning into this.


----------



## plantbrain

Honestly, I think Amano should be more concerned with diluting his Brand than to bother selling this rubbish, the small amount $ made is simply not worth tarnishing one's name with hokey marketing manure.

Sell the glass, sell the lights, the filter, the soil etc........but not all this stuff.

It does a disservice to everyone and the hobby.

If I made some juice in a bottle, but could not back it up, and claimed it helps over the long term subtly.........and there was no factual basis for it, or O warped some researcxh to suggest there was.....and with only trh power of belief and steer manure at my side..........could you use it and tell if it really worked or not for 19.99?

I mean it's only a little $$ for it and it might help, how can you be sure? Trust me, I take pretty pictures. 
Would you buy it? 

Then why would you buy this stuff???

I can easily make a product and give it some story.........some crazy talk........then sell it at a targeted range(curiously, these products are all right in the what the heck range of pricing.......even with all the supposed research claims and long effort that the claim suggest went into it........humm, all about 9.99 to 19.99.......).......and would anyone buy it?

Yes!
Why?
Belief alone.

I could even tell you it does not have any significant effects, and you'd still buy it? You bet!
It would just cost me my self respect.

Still, many would believe me, without ever confirming it and like a placebo.......I'd still get a few claiming it helped, even knowing that it's horse doo doo.

The same schpeil used to defend this rubbish can be used to market and defend "Tom's fresh pressed snake oil" in a bottle, intro pricing: 19.99 for 30mls, use daily 5 drops.

What is stopping me?

How would to test and see if it was BS or not? the same question applies to to Penac and Tourmaline.
Difference? I've already told you what I have is snake oil.

It might not be however, you should be open minded correct?

See? I'm appealing to your sense of fair play.

How's about this one: "There is much that Western Science does not yet know and understand, this revolutionary product from the shamans of Tibet have used for thousand's of years to cure imbalances in their fields can alos work miracles in aquariums and rid of algae and restore harmony to plant vitality."

See? I can play this manipulative game as well as any of them.
Difference? I still have my self respect and am not making $. Maybe your self respect can bought at a lower price?
Everyone has their price eh?

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

Garuf said:
			
		

> I've heard all these tales of Amano being a salesman before he's a hobbyist, he told one of the russian judges he only makes his tanks available in book form because people will pay money for them, for example.



I've seen this is person, many clubs are a bit ticked off after having him come to their events........however, he does drawn many fan boys/girls to the events, so it's a love hate relationship.

Still, he is an artist, and I honestly do not expect him to simply give away the photos or the "art". *This is how artist make their money, it's intellectual property* :idea: He's like a holy man preaching redemption. A great artist and poor salesman will end up poor, and great salesman can sell anything to anyone. So I do not think this fairly applies to selling Penac/touramline.........but rather is how intellectual property is sold like photo's.  

I'd say it's smart of his part, the Penac? Only makes his brand more questionable  
We have to be careful and be specific when we have issues with things.
We cannot poo poo all ADA, just the things that we do not agree with based on rational thought.

Many seek ADA like options to have the aesthetic, but are too cheap to pay for it, or simply cannot get it in their area, and hence DIY etc.

So this can lead to testing the products.

Wading through what is bunk and what is not is not easy, many do not care and go with whatever everyone else says later. Some parrot the marketing.

I've strongly advocated proving things to yourself and asking and posing the rhetorical questions to and for yourself.
This way you have proven it yourself, you can speak more about it, have a greater understanding etc.

I have not suggest blind faith. I do not think I ever will.


----------



## flyingfish

I have a feeling sales in Penac and Tourmaline BC etc will be down in the UK after this.


----------



## Ian Holdich

flyingfish said:
			
		

> I have a feeling sales in Penac and Tourmaline BC etc will be down in the UK after this.




noooooo, i'm off to order all of TGM stock right now!


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


> Homeopathic quackery products make billions $$ every year, I'd greatly prefer they not enter the aquarium market and will attack them with extreme prejudice. This is not personal, it's based on poor logic and often times outright crookedness and marketing scams, not products that offer any real help.


 I've got to agree with Tom, my personal opinion is that there probably are multifactorial vectors (dissolved O2, DOC, biofilm composition, redox potential in the substrate, possible allelopathic effects etc), that are difficult to quantify, that effect the stability of the aquarium. If you like it is a "faith position", but based upon my experience in Ecology.

Having said that there is a world of difference between an ecosystem approach and selling a variety of "magic bullets". 
I am 100% with Tom, this is "_homeopathic quackery_", the only reason for buying these products is the same rationale as if you bought Jimmy Choo shoes or the latest Dior, it is a lifestyle statement, it doesn't have any basis in science.

cheers Darrel


----------



## viktorlantos

Just wondering if any of you tried these products in the past. Or just accepted the skeptical posts.   

I've got feedback from many guys where Easy Carbo is not working, or EI ferts not brings those results. People who thinks that aeration is not needed in a planted tank etc... 

Penac is the only stuff which produced by another company. And ADA selling this under the original brand (by plocher). As i see Mr. Amano used many German stuff in the past. Including glasses, tools (solingen), probably the filtration (by eheim). Penac fits to this picture as a German stuff which enrich the environment based on the company instruction. So i guess the idea came from here.

http://www.organicsa.co.za/Products/Pen ... water.html
http://www.plocher.de/englisch/index.php

I would be intrested to see any study too, but since these not exist i only see their tanks which looks and works great. Its not like Dupla Tom   Even not Eheim, Tetra, Sera, JBL just to mention the large brands here. They are selling luxury products. And none of the previous mentioned brands fits into this field. Probably ELOS fits to this area only with their sortiment.

Maybe i am the only guy, but if fragrances CO would be acccessible in wide range on a normal price i would go with that?   

I agree there are no studies on these additives, but would that add anything to the most?

Tom, Seachem does that. Is that matter? Last time one of our forum members did a great study on filtration materials. Matrix is exactly the same as Van Gerven. Which is a fraction of the cost on the market. So then what worth the study then? Bio Rio from ADA is also inspected and because of its various structure just by microscopical study this is a better filtration material and cheaper then Matrix. Its better in structure than most of the bio materials out there, because they are using different materials with different structures.

http://akvakertesz.hu/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1746 
worth to check the full topic as he checked many bio and mech filtration media.

Beeing skeptical is ok. Use stuffs based on the study is ok too, but sometimes worth a try even if there are more negative feedback on an item. 

Without beeing an ADA fan boy as Tom said


----------



## viktorlantos

Garuf said:
			
		

> No, George, I've not noticed it as vehemently as it is on other forums but it's definitely sneaking in, it got so bad on other forums that if you didn't have ada in the title then you wouldn't get any views at all let alone comments! It's definitely sneaking in now we have the full ada ranges on tap and I'd be extremely sad to see it go that way, not after the loss of James c recently and Maz Maslain.



I do not think this is true Garuf. Maybe those 3 letters catch your attention, but we know we've seen many poor tanks with great gears in the past. This does not matter if this is ADA or any other. If a tank is good, well served for the visitors this got more attention then others. That's all.

At the end the comment on my aquascape worth 100 times more than a comment on my gear. I hope i am not alone


----------



## GreenNeedle

I don't think it is as bad as Garuf is saying however I do notice that if someone does a scape in an ADA tank the title of the journal will include *ADA 60P* or whatever that tank is.  I don't see many journals that have 'Fluval 125' or 'Juwel 125' in their title.  There are some of course but with ADA ones it is ALWAYS part of the title.

Its a case of they want to show off and where most of us use a scape title ADA tank owners always make sure that everyone knows that the scape is in an ADA tank.

They do get more posts though.  A little like some prestige added to the post just as a top scaper will get more posts on his/her threads than an unknown.

Much like a Ferrari owner leaving his car in the driveway rather than Garage so everybody can see it.

AC


----------



## Mark Evans

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> little like some prestige added to the post just as a top scaper will get more posts on his/her threads than an unknown.



Nah...not true mate.


----------



## GreenNeedle

Come on Mark you know it is true.  I have nothing against it.  People will always be more likely to open a thread by yourself or George or any other top scaper.  Its is natural to want to see what the best are doing etc and to see the quality of photography.  Thats fine.  Nothing wrong with that.  The name draws more watchers.That is a natural occurrence and reputations are made and earned 

However it does peeve me to open a journal page and see loads of titles that just look the same like ADA 60P, Rimless Starfire 36 etc.  Its like the tank brand becomes more important than th scape in a way.  Takes a little away for me.

Saying that if I spent a fortune on an ADA tank it would probably mean I watch to show off.  That is what I am like with other things 

AC


----------



## George Farmer

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> Much like a Ferrari owner leaving his car in the driveway rather than Garage so everybody can see it.


Maybe they have to do that because their garage is packed full of ADA gear.


----------



## viktorlantos

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> I don't think it is as bad as Garuf is saying however I do notice that if someone does a scape in an ADA tank the title of the journal will include ADA 60P or whatever that tank is. I don't see many journals that have 'Fluval 125' or 'Juwel 125' in their title. There are some of course but with ADA ones it is ALWAYS part of the title.



Well that's interesting. Some may use it to show off you're right. Maybe they are proud to their newbie or so. Maybe they waited so long to get a good gear. No prob with that. We're the ones who click more to those topics and giving compliments on gears and forgot about the scape the most.  

On the other hand this is a nice achievment from a brand that people use it even in their topics. Many other brand would love to have a community like this around it's product range.

For me a great feedback if you check all the major contests out there and the equiments, tanks, lights etc means nothing there. Only that living world which the person created. That's why it does not matter what people use in their topic name. Use something which catch the attention if the scape is good and you will get more feedback for sure, but even without that you can be on the top of the contests everywhere.


----------



## GreenNeedle

George Farmer said:
			
		

> SuperColey1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Much like a Ferrari owner leaving his car in the driveway rather than Garage so everybody can see it.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe they have to do that because their garage is packed full of ADA gear.
Click to expand...


Lol.  The tank would indeed be safer in the garage than on the driveway 

Viktor.  Indeed they are proud of their gear.  What they wanted for ages and that is a compliment to the brand.  However it is the brand name that is the prestige not the actual components in reality.  Yes the gear is good,  Yes many of the ingredients are good also, however some are just buy it because its ADA.

Makes me chuckle at the many who have their ADA products lined up next to the tank.  They are part of the 'display'.  Can't have them hidden in the cupboard.  Those bottles need to be seen 

At the end of the day if these work then great.  If the scaper is happy to buy a product whether it works or not thats also fine.  I think a lot of it is more for the 'statement' it gives than the actual usefulness.

I think its for each person to choose what they want to do and what they want to use and have no problem with anyone who wants to use any product but it is annoying how you can't say anything against some brands or processes without a barrage of defensive attacks from fan boys.

This isn't ADA specific though.  There are fanboys of all methods, brands etc including EI and some get far too aggressive in 'defence' of their beliefs.

Let all choose their way and give advice but no need for the aggression.  Those who want to listen or learn have no need for that and those who don't want to listen and learn or disagree will not accept a different opinion no matter how forecefully it is put to them.

At the end of the day all hobbies need a prestigious end and a DIY end.  Thats what makes things interesting.  to see if the DIY/cheapo option can achieve what the prestigious option does.  In this case I think it does.

And with the hardware end We would all like the B&W speakers and Denon systems.  None of us would have a Bush setup if we had the choice   Therefore if ADA is the dream then go for it.

AC


----------



## mrjackdempsey

[quote="plantbrain. Maybe your self respect can bought at a lower price?
Everyone has their price eh?

Regards, 
Tom Barr[/quote]
 I'm afraid my self respect was gone out the window after my first girlfriend   Interesting that even if something that can't be proved to be of benefit is still seen as vital or at least advantageous, but I suppose on the other side of the coin just because we can't understand the reasons doesn't mean it doesn't work.Nothing more unreasonable as a person that won't reason. In my case though it's a mute point as 
1) I can't afford ADA and 
2) In my mind seems like a lot of money for goods that take pride in their limits and imperfections( lights that are weaker than norm regarding wattage or tanks that you can see distortion in the glass. Maybe we are guilty of the mind set of the emperor as in his new clothes or inverted snobbery.


----------



## Morgan Freeman

So who's going to test it? Would make a good PFK article!


----------



## bigmatt

I'll test it!  I think i can grow algae pretty effeectively in ANY setup!   
Really interesting thread- particularly as i love the ADA aesthetic (but can't afford it) but have never bought into the ADA "chemistry set".  I'd love to give it a go one day, but only when my planting has got to such a stage that i feel i can make some comparison with cheaper end products. 
M


----------



## plantbrain

mrjackdempsey said:
			
		

> I'm afraid my self respect was gone out the window after my first girlfriend



For every pretty gal you see, there's a guy out there that wished he'd NEVER met her.
Same is true for women's side of that coin.



> Interesting that even if something that can't be proved to be of benefit is still seen as vital or at least advantageous, but I suppose on the other side of the coin just because we can't understand the reasons doesn't mean it doesn't work.Nothing more unreasonable as a person that won't reason.



Or wants to bemoan the fact we do not understand it, therefore there's still some remote.........as it really is.......a slight chance they might be correct.

This approach sells Billions in the Fake diet industry.

Oh......but no one would every stoop to this level in the Aquarium hobby eh???



> In my case though it's a mute point as
> 1) I can't afford ADA and
> 2) In my mind seems like a lot of money for goods that take pride in their limits and imperfections( lights that are weaker than norm regarding wattage or tanks that you can see distortion in the glass. Maybe we are guilty of the mind set of the emperor as in his new clothes or inverted snobbery.



Much more like a social collective neurosis


----------



## plantbrain

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> This isn't ADA specific though.  There are fanboys of all methods, brands etc including EI and some get far too aggressive in 'defence' of their beliefs.
> AC



Sure, but.........
EI is not a "brand"  
EI is not selling a single thing. 
EI does not suggest homeopathic rubbish.
These are not comparable in the context of this topic.
Nor is EI a belief nor expects anyone to accept belief as part of the method, nor uses cheese ball marketing ploys.

I understand some get a bit religious with EI...........and go over the top there........but I do not support that, it discredits and rational side of things. Diet pills are better comparison, or Dupla, Derrenle's line etc.

Penac is not part of ADA's method really......... nor is touramline...these where co opted from the homeopathic trades and added to the ADA's brand. 

There's no Science behind this rubbish. There is for dosing ferts and such. Distilled and not confused by tangential rubbish.....it really is quite a simple debate.

Belief vs facts.


----------



## wearsbunnyslippers

Penac = *Composition: Calcium Carbonate (98.1% + 0.9% MgCO3 = 99%)

"In the Plocher System this fine energy is concentrated by an apparatus and used to copy or imprint the attributes of one or more substances onto other substances. It works much like a photo copier or a laser printer where the energy of the laser beam is replaced by the focused energy of the Plocher apparatus. 

The energy itself is assumed to have a minute wavelength and can therefore not be measured by instruments currently available to science."

sound like placebo and chicanery to anyone else? 

you can even buy a penac kat to attach to your water pipes so that all the water in your home is revitalised by energetic oscillation.. come to think of it you could attach these directly to your tanks, i wonder how long before these are ADA branded?

http://www.organicsa.co.za/Products/Penac/PENAC-KAT/penac-kat.html


----------



## Morgan Freeman

OMG. Utter new age gibberish. You'd have just as much luck sacrificing a goat and praying for good plant growth.


----------



## bigmatt

And at least you'd get a nice goat curry when you'd done!  Now there's an idea.... 
M


----------



## ghostsword

They may be cheaper than the one that ADA sells..  

But regarding Penac, where did they come with that concept? It had to come from somewhere, right?


----------



## BigTom

Having bored myself silly doing expenses claims at work all afternoon I just spent 15 minutes reading up on the Plocher stuff as a bit of a break, some of the most hilariously obvious quackery I've ever read. 

I particularly liked the picture of the sweetcorn in the here 

http://www.wallenstein.pt/english/PrintVersion.pdf


----------



## Garuf

Every time someone buys into new age pseudo-science a real scientist dies. 

Some great finds, really adds weight to the "I sell it because I'm told to" quote, utter garbage all round.


----------



## Garuf

plantbrain said:
			
		

> There's no Science behind this rubbish. There is for dosing ferts and such. Distilled and not confused by tangential rubbish.....it really is quite a simple debate.
> 
> Belief vs facts.


Brilliant! Cuts straight to the matter of things, there's no real fact in most of these arguments, it's always geared by peoples beliefs which explains why people take it as attacks and are so vitriolic in their response and how it instantly becomes personal.


----------



## Ian Holdich

good find Tom!

I like the pond in Greece that they treated with Penac, it clearly isn't the same pond. 

At the end of the day, people will always believe in this type of rubbish, it's human nature. As most comments in this thread state, 'it's a shame that people do believe', it's such a waste of hard earned money!

right, anyone want to buy some magic beans?


----------



## Morgan Freeman

Wow, I started this thread out as to ascertain whether my scepticism of these products was unfounded, I think I can safely conclude I was right to be sceptical.....and then some.


----------



## plantbrain

Morgan Freeman said:
			
		

> Wow, I started this thread out as to ascertain whether my scepticism of these products was unfounded, I think I can safely conclude I was right to be sceptical.....and then some.



Do not ever loose that thinking. The corporate overlords in the USA have tried and done a very good job beating it out of people here. 

This crap has entered agriculture also here in CA, often called Biodynamic farming, organic farming and sustainable methods I STRONGLY advocate like a holy man preaching redemption.........(But I have some facts, not a holy book), but they take this and add some spiritual Gia type baloney and ruin all the good factual business aspects and toss in the quackery.

Has really been popular with the Napa and Sonoma Wine nut jobs.

I;'m in Ag central here as the USDA UC Davis CA, USA region for this stuff, and the entire GMO debate. Researchers are leary of all this stuff and how it's marketed and controlled as intellectual property(Monsanto, Cargill etc)

The stakes are MUCH higher here, than in our dinky little hobby..........but the same type of stuff, at different scales. I do not think Amano is the CEO even in the same league as any of those crooked people and thankfully so........He's fairly reasonable in person and humor etc.  The video of him saying it's what the marketing guys said......seems about right.

Penac is just one thing though, Tourmaline, Power sand etc, these should tested and considered as well, as well as ADA aqua soil etc, the tanks, the lights etc......

Some of this is GREAT! Some, not so great.......but what did you expect? Snake oil or a silver bullet?
The reality is a little of both.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


> Do not ever loose that thinking. The corporate overlords in the USA have tried and done a very good job beating it out of people here. This crap has entered agriculture also here in CA, often called Biodynamic farming, organic farming and sustainable methods I STRONGLY advocate like a holy man preaching redemption.........(But I have some facts, not a holy book), but they take this and add some spiritual Gia type baloney and ruin all the good factual business aspects and toss in the quackery.





> and the entire GMO debate. Researchers are leary of all this stuff and how it's marketed and controlled as intellectual property(Monsanto, Cargill etc).



Unfortunately we are rapidly going the same way in the UK, where it is difficult to have any form of informed debate on science generally or agriculture & GM crops in particular. We still have some of the press that makes an effort, but the stuff printed in the popular press, and particularly the "Dail Mail", is just incredible. 

I recommend "Bad Science"  <http://www.badscience.net/about-dr-ben-goldacre/> to our students.

cheers Darrel


----------



## Radik

And worst of all CO2 climate change propaganda.


----------



## BigTom

Radik said:
			
		

> And worst of all CO2 climate change propaganda.



I don't think opening that can of worms will be of any benefit to this thread (unless you were refering to the dificulty in  having any sort of reasoned conversation about it, in which case ignore me   )


----------



## Radik

BigTom said:
			
		

> Radik said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And worst of all CO2 climate change propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think opening that can of worms will be of any benefit to this thread (unless you were refering to the dificulty in  having any sort of reasoned conversation about it, in which case ignore me   )
Click to expand...


I am ignoring you


----------



## clonitza

This discussion reminded me of Dan Ariely 





Have a nice day guys!


----------



## SuperWen

*Penac W: * 
SiO2 99.2% Al2O3 0.42% Fe2O3 0.021% TiO2 0.03%
K2O 0.11% NaO2 0.01% CaO 0.02% MgO 0.02%
-> more than 99% is silica powder

*Penac P:*
Calcium Carbonate (98.1% + 0.9% MgCO3 = 99%)
-> 98% calcite + 1% magnecium carbonate

*ADA Powersand:*
porous volcanic stones 
-> pumice

*ADA Powersand special:*
porous volcanic stones + ADA clear super + ADA Bacter 100

*ADA Clear Super*
highly refined activated carbon powder mixed with several nutrients

*ADA Bacter 100*
Containing more than 100 different kinds of micro organisms in a dormant state.

*ADA Tourmaline BC:*
iron, aluminium, sodium, boron, lithium and magnesium

source from ADA catalogue and google

analysis for ADA soil, Step-1, Step-2, Step-3, green brighty, green shade, Brighty-K, you can get in Barr Newsletter (only for exclusive member in barrreport)


----------



## Morgan Freeman

dw1305 said:
			
		

> I recommend "Bad Science"  <http://www.badscience.net/about-dr-ben-goldacre/> to our students.
> 
> cheers Darrel



Fantastic resource. The book is a must.


----------



## Morgan Freeman

Radik said:
			
		

> And worst of all CO2 climate change propaganda.



What's the relevance of this post?


----------



## Radik

See those other 2 topics from DW and T. Barr above  to get idea. If still nothing then read more than once. If that does not help then just watch TV.


----------



## Morgan Freeman

Radik said:
			
		

> See those other 2 topics from DW and T. Barr above  to get idea. If still nothing then read more than once. If that does not help then just watch TV.



It's pretty obvious I'm following the general trend of the thread, being the person who started it. I wasn't sure which angle you were coming from in terms of "climate change propaganda", it's an accusation levied at both sides.


----------



## gmartins

Selling cat for rabit is as old as humankind. It's up to the individual to make their mind about these products and stuff.

The climate change though... It's on top of the day among the scientific community. In fact, the scientific community is not discussing whether it's a fact or a myth anymore. No doubt there. They are now focusing on predicting its consequences. (http://www.int-res.com/journals/cr/cr-home/)

cheers,

GM


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


> The climate change though...  In fact, the scientific community is not discussing whether it's a fact or a myth anymore. No doubt there. They are now focusing on predicting its consequences. (http://www.int-res.com/journals/cr/cr-home/)


I'm not entering the climate debate, but this is what I mean, despite overwhelming scientific evidence for global warming, those with a vested interest in obscuring the facts are being ever more successful in confusing the public.  





> Public conviction about the threat of climate change has declined sharply after months of questions over the science and growing disillusionment with government action, a leading British poll has found. The proportion of adults who believe climate change is "definitely" a reality dropped by 30% over the last year, from 44% to 31%, in the latest survey by Ipsos Mori.


 from <http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/23/british-public-belief-climate-poll> 

This is another one current in the USA: 





> It's not yet lights out: Republicans have revived their effort to crush energy-saving lightbulbs, with a vote in the House of Representatives as early as Friday.
> 
> Just days after losing their effort to repeal a law promoting more efficient lighting, Republicans – who claim the new standards are an assault on personal freedom – have revived their effort.
> 
> The latest offering, put forward by the Texas Republican Michael Burgess, would seek to tack an amendment onto a broader bill cutting funds for environmental protection.
> 
> Like the original, the bill to hinder the take-up of energy-saving bulbs would stop the federal government from enacting the provisions of a 2007 law raising efficiency standards of incandescent bulbs by 25%, starting from 2012. But it would not block city or state governments from promoting energy-saving lighting.
> 
> Republicans – including presidential contender Michele Bachmann – have championed the cause of old-fashioned 100-watt bulbs as a fight for personal freedom and the legacy of Thomas Edison, who invented it


 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jul/15/republicans-energy-saving-lightbulbs>

cheers Darrel


----------



## Morgan Freeman

Michele Bachman. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious.


----------



## glueyporchtreatment

Personally, I grew a lots of orchids, aroids, houseplants, and vegetables (in containers and hydroponic systems) before I ever maintained a planted aquarium. Coming from a more traditional horticultural background, I assure you that scientific evidence is often at odds with the current practice of commercial and hobbyist plant growers. 

One of the best examples of the discord between scientific research and practical application in horticulture (as it applies to hobbyist and commercial growers) is the use of high phosphorous fertilizers. In general, the majority of plant growers, particularly growers perennial flowering plants, believe that high P fertilizers induce flowering and contribute to better overall plant health. However, reports published by the scientific community conclude that ornamental plants do not benefit from phosphorous provided in excess of the 3:1:2 N-P-K ratio (given that nutrients exceed limiting thresholds and environmental conditions are conducive to growth). I used to side with the hard science and therefore the 3:1:2 club, but I was  eventually persuaded by a local nursery owner to experiment with 1:2:2 ferts on a few orchids and anthuriums that were giving me trouble. In short, the results were so excellent that I now seldom use 3:1:2 formulations on my terrestrial plants.

I can't provide any hard evidence as to why I've had better results fertilizing with higher P ferts (relative to N and K), but I'd rather go with what my eyes and plants are telling me instead the what's written the science journals.  

The same applies to what I see in my aquariums. I was initially very skeptical of the real value of aquasoil given its price and lack of scientific backing. However, I gave it a try after seeing lots of fabulous aquasoil tanks and, given the great firsthand results, I'm now more than happy to pay over $30 for what essentially amounts to a bag of clay and humus. Moreover, the results I've had with other ADA products like power sand and Green Brighty Step 2 have definitely converted me from an ADA skeptic to a believer. 

The reality is that the scientific community isn't going to provide much help to planted tank hobbyist until the hobby starts making a lot of people a lot of money; only then would the kind of grant money that attracts the best minds follow. So, given the current paucity of research and my general experience with horticulture, I think most hobbyists should go with what their plants are telling them instead of the Ph.Ds. 

The market is always going to be full of snake oils, magic bullets and egregious marketing practices and blogs/forums will always be laden with poor or misconstrued information that's somehow passed off as 'science'. 

So basically, trust no one, and use your eyes as well as your head.


----------



## gmartins

Placebo also works... sometimes!!!

GM


----------



## Morgan Freeman

The type of science required for testing these projects isn't complicated, nor overly expensive. Anyone with a basic understanding of the scientific method could test these products. Maybe as individuals it wouldn't be so affordable, but there's no reason a magazine such as PFK couldn't perform some tests. Maybe I'll post something on the PFK forum as a suggestion for an article.


----------



## Fred Dulley

Morgan Freeman said:
			
		

> but there's no reason a magazine such as PFK couldn't perform some tests.



That would be cool. But PFK have to pick their words very carefully when criticizing products. They wouldn't be allowed to flat out say, "there is no point in this product as no positive effects were observed". Manufacturers wouldn't be very happy about that


----------



## BigTom

Fred Dulley said:
			
		

> Morgan Freeman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but there's no reason a magazine such as PFK couldn't perform some tests.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be cool. But PFK have to pick their words very carefully when criticizing products. They wouldn't be allowed to flat out say, "there is no point in this product as no positive effects were observed". Manufacturers wouldn't be very happy about that
Click to expand...


Why not? Plenty of other mags across all other subject areas are allowed to slate products or services which they find no benefit in.


----------



## Fred Dulley

No idea. I just remember reading a thread on the PFK forum (which I won't use again) that described how...lenient and appropriate they had to be with this sort of thing.
Obviously they can list some flaws that a product might have (we can see this in their tried and tested sections) but flat out saying a product is worthless is something they'll try avoid.


----------



## George Farmer

Morgan Freeman said:
			
		

> The type of science required for testing these projects isn't complicated, nor overly expensive. Anyone with a basic understanding of the scientific method could test these products. Maybe as individuals it wouldn't be so affordable, but there's no reason a magazine such as PFK couldn't perform some tests. Maybe I'll post something on the PFK forum as a suggestion for an article.


You could also try emailing Jeremy Gay, the editor, or Nathan Hill, their technical writer.

jeremy.gay@bauermedia.co.uk
nathan.hill@bauermedia.co.uk


----------



## Morgan Freeman

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Morgan Freeman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The type of science required for testing these projects isn't complicated, nor overly expensive. Anyone with a basic understanding of the scientific method could test these products. Maybe as individuals it wouldn't be so affordable, but there's no reason a magazine such as PFK couldn't perform some tests. Maybe I'll post something on the PFK forum as a suggestion for an article.
> 
> 
> 
> You could also try emailing Jeremy Gay, the editor, or Nathan Hill, their technical writer.
> 
> jeremy.gay@bauermedia.co.uk
> nathan.hill@bauermedia.co.uk
Click to expand...


Thanks George. I'll email Nathan as I bigged him up over his live feeding article


----------



## George Farmer

Morgan Freeman said:
			
		

> George Farmer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Morgan Freeman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The type of science required for testing these projects isn't complicated, nor overly expensive. Anyone with a basic understanding of the scientific method could test these products. Maybe as individuals it wouldn't be so affordable, but there's no reason a magazine such as PFK couldn't perform some tests. Maybe I'll post something on the PFK forum as a suggestion for an article.
> 
> 
> 
> You could also try emailing Jeremy Gay, the editor, or Nathan Hill, their technical writer.
> 
> jeremy.gay@bauermedia.co.uk
> nathan.hill@bauermedia.co.uk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks George. I'll email Nathan as I bigged him up over his live feeding article
Click to expand...

Good idea. Very clever guy and one of the best writers I know.


----------



## plantbrain

dw1305 said:
			
		

> I recommend "Bad Science"  <http://www.badscience.net/about-dr-ben-goldacre/> to our students.
> 
> cheers Darrel



Good one, I use this site often for whacky water stuff, you will find a few ADA ingredients in there.

http://www.chem1.com/CQ/wonkywater.html

A lot of this stuff comes in from other business areas and the marketing folks often say, "Hey, let's try this here and here.......", they have never once tested this rubbish.

It does not hurt........but also does not do anything.

Tourmaline is a classic example.

Heating cables caused a huge ruckcus here with a certain crotchety old man and led to some legal threats.

I actively support ADA, but I still question some of the products, as I or any rational person should, the faithful and the fan boys.........will fight against this and will say the same types of things as the diet pill folks.


----------



## dw1305

Hi all,


> Good one, I use this site often for whacky water stuff, you will find a few ADA ingredients in there.


 Thanks Tom, it is a good read, even if the content is fairly depressing. We still have a couple of BBC radio programs in the UK that look at this sort of thing ("More or Less" which looks at what figures and percentages in the press actually mean is on Radio 4 at the moment), but the snake oil salesmen are gaining an increasing foothold and people are often unable to differentiate between them and the real thing -  <http://www.badscience.net/2008/03/radio-4-the-rise-of-the-lifestyle-nutritionists/>.

cheers Darrel


----------



## plantbrain

dw1305 said:
			
		

> Hi all,
> 
> 
> 
> Good one, I use this site often for whacky water stuff, you will find a few ADA ingredients in there.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Tom, it is a good read, even if the content is fairly depressing. We still have a couple of BBC radio programs in the UK that look at this sort of thing ("More or Less" which looks at what figures and percentages in the press actually mean is on Radio 4 at the moment), but the snake oil salesmen are gaining an increasing foothold and people are often unable to differentiate between them and the real thing -  <http://www.badscience.net/2008/03/radio-4-the-rise-of-the-lifestyle-nutritionists/>.
> 
> cheers Darrel
Click to expand...


This type of stuff is making more and more headway as the public is becoming more and more dumbed down. 
It's very tough to stop it and all I can do is hope some folks use critical thinking and have a brain. The USA is Terrible about this stuff. I think we invented this rubbish give the level we have here, but it's been around for eons.
I just try and stop some of it from entering the hobby as best I can. ADA is not immune themselves.


----------

