[compost_tea] Re: Anaerobic Activity
I agree with this in general. So often the use of smoke and mirrors causes =
the discussion to be moved away from the points originally asserted.
Tim
--- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tad" <tadhussey_at_...> wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> You've completely changed the subject of our conversation and avoided my
> original question altogether. When replying to my posts, please leave
> my reply and do not change the subject heading to something else that's
> out of context. I never made any comments regarding or advocating for
> the use of ACT on leafy greens or in relation to the NOP
> recommendations.
>
> I've re-attached my post to this thread and ask that you please re-read
> what I was talking about. Here's what I have issue with. People come
> into this forum and make blanket statements and then hint at
> testing/research/data to support it. Your statement below suggests that
> compost extract is somehow safer than ACT. The first time I asked you,
> you changed the subject heading to "food safety and ACT" and replied:
>
> food safety and aact
> Tad,
>
> So you can have all of the data in the world but at the end of the day,
> in the
> commercial ag world, it is a risk-based becomes a business decision in
> regards
> to applying AACT or extract liquid or for that matter compost and
> vermicompost
> or anything to a crop.
>
> It also depends upon how much liability insurance you have. I can only
> afford to
> buy only so many acres of leafy greens if I screw up.
>
> For me, it is less risky to apply extracts and other additives.
>
> Mike,
>
> You were the one who said you had "testing" not me. You again hint at
> the idea that extracts are "less risky" than ACT. I don't believe this
> to be the case (and keep in mind I'm making the assumption of equal
> testing and quality control between extract and ACT).
>
> If you don't have any testing or data to support you statements, than
> please just state that it's your opinion or hypothesis. You're free to
> speculate as well, but please don't speak from a position of authority
> unless you have some education or knowledge or testing to back it up.
> If that was all it took to be an expert, I'd be down in CA somewhere
> right now, interning for Ted Petersen.
>
> ~Tad
>
> PS: Your google article on molasses seems to support my position in
> regards to compost teas and pathogen-free parent material.
>
>
> --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, Tad Hussey <tadhussey_at_> wrote:
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > Thanks for the response. I've cut and pasted the text that contains
> my
> > pertinent question, and then responded according below:
> >
> > >" I agree that some of the same issues apply to extract and AACT.
> Both AACT and
> >
> > > extract have a degree of risk tied to them but not to the same
> degree.
> > >
> > > Liquid extracts are far less dynamic and more dormant spore
> environments. In
> > > many ways,the extract(s) more reflects the compost or vermicompost
> that it was
> >
> > > made from. The testing I have done supports this. Thus if the
> vermicompost
> > > parent materials is pathogen negative than there is a very good
> probability
> > >that
> > >
> > > the water extract will also be pathogen negative."
> >
> > This is the text that I would love to see some data to support. I've
> bolded the
> > section I'm referring to, but didn't want to take it out of context.
> >
> >
> > I've actually done e.coli testing in ACT using the our 5 gallon
> brewing system,
> > back in 2002 in conjunction with Dr. Ingham, where e.coli was
> purposely
> > introduced. At the end of the brewing cycle it was virtually
> undetectable. I
> > can dig up the SFI reports if you would like.
> >
> > If the parent material contains no pathogens, and you have a
> consistent brewer
> > and brewing process, then how does compost extract have any advantage
> over ACT?
> > Your ACT will not contain any pathogens either. Based on the fact
> that these
> > pathogens are facultative anaerobes, I speculate that ACT could
> actually have an
> > advantage, in that there is an aerobic brewing process, where aerobic
> microbes
> > could out-compete faculative anaerobes (in this case the e.coli) and
> render the
> > tea safer than an extract.
> >
> > So I'm curious if you have any data that shows where extract and ACT
> were made
> > from the same parent material, proper methodology was followed, and
> the extract
> > came back clean and the ACT full of pathogens.
> >
> > Personally I agree that the dangers are overstated in any regard, but
> I
> > understand why some of these food safety guidelines are in place.
> >
> > ~Tad
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: mikethewormguy mikethewormguy_at_
> > To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Mon, May 30, 2011 3:11:31 PM
> > Subject: [compost_tea] Re: Anaerobic Activity
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Tad,
> >
> > The context for the statement is food safety and in regard to negative
> pathogens
> > ONLY. In short, the data showed negative pathogens in parent material
> and
> > negative pathogens in extracted parent material liquid. It is pretty
> straight
> > forward from a food safety perspective. The data is specific to my
> situation
> > thus posting it does not provide others with actionable information
> since you
> > are not using my parent material.
> >
> > If you are interested in learning more, you can create your own data
> set by
> > testing your parent material and AACT liquid for :
> >
> > Ecoli
> > Salmonella
> > Shingella
> > Fecal coliforms
> > Listeria
> >
> > which are some of the target microbial 'outlaws' in Food Safety Land.
> >
> > Here is what you can do.... First, you can validate that you do not
> have
> > pathogens in both your parent material and AACT liquid. Second, you
> can verify
> > the same by testing multiple batches to get a big enough dataset to
> analyze
> > where n=30.
> >
> > Also one additional point to consider is that unless you have
> validated your
> > equipment cleaning procedures than your equipment could be a source
> for
> > pathogenic biofilm, from say, prior bird or mouse poop. This has
> nothing to do
> > with AACT and everything to do with equipment design (i.e. 90 degree
> angles) and
> > sanitation and storage location.
> >
> >
> > All of this is academic and kinda of boring if you are primary using
> the AACT on
> > your garden and wash your vegeees before eating.
> >
> > If you work in commercial ag than all this is all part of being in
> Food Safety
> > Land......
> >
> > At the recent Vermiculture conference I attended there was some great
> side
> > discussion on food safety and composted dairy manure based
> vermicompost.
> >
> >
> > Mike Flynn
> > Green Quest LLC
> > BioSpecific LLC
> >
> > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, Tad Hussey tadhussey_at_ wrote:
> > >
> > > Mike,
> > >
> > > Would you be so kind as to post this data, and expand on what you
> mean by this
> >
> > > statement?
> > > "In many ways, the extract(s) more reflects the compost or
> vermicompost that
> > >it
> > >
> > > was made from. The testing I have done supports this."
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > > Tad
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: mikethewormguy mikethewormguy_at_
> > > To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Mon, May 30, 2011 1:03:30 PM
> > > Subject: [compost_tea] Re: Anaerobic Activity
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tim,
> > >
> > > I agree that some of the same issues apply to extract and AACT. Both
> AACT and
> > > extract have a degree of risk tied to them but not to the same
> degree.
> > >
> > > Liquid extracts are far less dynamic and more dormant spore
> environments. In
> > > many ways, the extract(s) more reflects the compost or vermicompost
> that it was
> > >
> > > made from. The testing I have done supports this. Thus if the
> vermicompost
> > > parent materials is pathogen negative than there is a very good
> probability
> > >that
> > >
> > > the water extract will also be pathogen negative.
> > >
> > >
> > > At the end of the day, it becomes a risk based business decision as
> to whether
> >
> > > to use AACT on a commercial food crop during its growout phase. It
> is the
> > >market
> > >
> > > that the grower needs to convince.
> > >
> > > BTW.... I do not have any vermicompost extracts applied during the
> crop growout
> > >
> > > cycle. It is not worth the risk for me. There are other tools
> available to me
> >
> > > for use during growout.
> > >
> > > There is no right or wrong to the use of AACT on food crops. I had
> one grower
> > > tell me that his customers do not keep him from using AACT during
> the growout
> > > but they just won't buy the product. So what would you do ?
> > >
> > > There are many fine uses for AACT where food safety is not the
> primary issue.
> > >
> > > 3 cents...
> > >
> > > Mike Flynn
> > > Green Quest LLC
> > > BioSpecific LLC
> > >
> > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tim Wilson" <thegoodjob_at_>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Mike, I'm sure you are aware that the exact same applies to liquid
> compost
> > > >extract.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Received on Tue May 31 2011 - 15:50:34 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Feb 07 2012 - 13:58:10 EST