This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: milk feeding

> Date:          Fri, 22 Aug 1997 17:55:38 +1000 (EST)
> To:            pumpkins@athenet.net
> From:          vmarsden@postoffice.utas.edu.au (Vanessa Marsden)
> Subject:       Re: milk feeding

Vanessa said, 
> Three responses to this.
> 
> Firstly, scientific testing never proves anything worthless. (Only
> incorrect interpretation does) The truth about science is there are no
> facts. Science can ONLY prove that something is likely to be worthwhile.
> 

I think that it would not be too hard for scientific testing to 
prove that salt water is worthless as a life maintaining source of 
fluids for humans. (I do mean sea water that has not been 
desalinated)

> Secondly,
> 
> My control group- nine fruit bearing siblings of the plant in question.
> Also fruit on other vines of the plant in question. Larger and smaller.
> None showed growth rates like the sucrose fed pumpkin. For a stage 1 trial,
> that's quite a positive result. This year I can conduct stage two. Next
> year stage 3, with a large population of all types of squash. I will slit
> half and feed them a sucrose solution. I will slit the other half and feed
> a water placebo. Of course, the entire trial will be double blind, so
> neither I nor the pumpkins will know what they are getting. I am currently
> preparing a submission to sugar companies for funding, and of course have
> submitted an experimental outline to the neighbourrhood ethics comittee.
> The results will be published ina suitable journal. The time required for
> the project is 1.75 people per week. Of course I am an equal opportunity
> employer. Would you accept any results then?
> 
I guess this is an attempt at acerbic humor because someone has 
suggested that you should provide evidence to support your claims.

> Thirdly
> 
> the attitudes shown by what I hope to be the vocal minority of this group
> are quite disheartening.Hope your pumpkins go well in the future, with or
> without human intervention, and don't explode.
> 
Why are you disheartend? Would you prefer that your feelings and 
beliefs be taken as gospel? I think you said that the one surcrose 
fed pumpkin was doing well, maybe it was just the best pumpkin of the 
group. I have four pumpkins all with great variation is size. None of 
them are milk fed, so why is the big one bigger than the others? You 
see, without a controlled experiment you can never be sure that there 
was not some other reason that caused the results you got. With a lot 
of pumpkins in the test the odds increase greatly that the result was 
not just a fluke.  I think that the people that grow giant pumpkins 
would do almost anything if they thought it would grow a bigger 
pumpkin. Most of the experienced growers don't believe in milk 
feeding and aren't likely to change their minds without some real 
evidence.

If I wrote in that everyone should use salt water to water their 
plants would you do it? If I said that I used magnets to grow a 
bigger pumpkin would you buy some from me? If you would I'll tell you 
where to send the money.

I think all growers would welcome some real evidence that milk 
feeding is worthwhile. Take heart, if you are right you will have the 
new world record soon and you will have the last laugh.

P.S. I hope your pumpkins aren't lactose intolerant.


Ken
References:
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index