Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 14:37:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Perry Malouf <pmalouf@access.digex.net> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg3933$foo@default> Subject: Casual endorsements of Supethrive
drake@aol.com has said that he is convinced of the effectiveness of
Superthrive on CP, because the ingredients have proven themselves
when used on other plants. He does not cite personal experience,
and has admitted to never reading specific information about the
effectiveness of Superthrive (he's convinced, so why waste the time?).
Yet he has posted what amounts to an endorsement of the product's
use on cp, and this is where I disagree. I don't think that anyone should
endorse any such thing unless they have personal experience with it or
unless they are aware of other experiences (reports from other growers,
published papers, etc.) . Until recently, other subscribers' reports
from personal experience have mostly been anecdotal.
A general posting that endorses some course of action does not help
anyone unless there's some evidence to back it up. Casual references
to various government agencies (probably read off the Superthrive label)
that may or may not have done experiments doesn't count as evidence
that the product will work great on cp.
I have already posted that I could discern no positive effects that were
unambiguously attributable to Superthrive among my Nepenthes and
orchids.
Andrew Marshall recently wrote about an experiment he did:
> ...I have done experiments with controls etc as Perry suggests.
> The experiments were done on Sarracenia seedlings and
> Drosera of the usual extrmemly common sorts...
> ...The results as I recall were that there were NO discernable
> differences in growth or vigor between the plants at all...
> Now, I still use superthrive on occasion...
This is one example. Others have recently reported positive
effects on transplanted Nepenthes.
More and more information is coming in, and this is good. It is
always better to make an informed decision as to what you will
try on your plants. The "take it on faith" attitude is fine for
religion, but not for serious cultivation of plants.
And I repeat, just because Superthrive has shown some benefit
on some plants doesn't mean those effects will carry over to all
plants. Yes, cp are plants but there is tremendous variation among
plants as regards nutrition storage and use, nutrition uptake, etc.
Plant growth needs more than growth hormone, it needs the raw
materials to produce the growth. We all know that cp often
grow in places where nitrogen (needed for growth) is not plentiful.
How does growth hormone work on a nitrogen-starved plant?
I don't know, but the point is that the effects of a growth hormone
(or Superthrive) may not be the same for all plants.
And this issue is considerably more complicated than "dropping stones
to check the effects of gravity". Gravity has been well described and
characterized for a long time now. Not so the effects of Superthrive
on cp--the area could use a lot more investigation.
Regards,
Perry Malouf
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:12 PST