Bio-film at 11:00. Hey, just a little humor from up here in Anchorage wher=
e
the fungi are caroling 'neath a BIG blanket of snow. Wayne Lewis
p.s. Elaine, did you get my off-list e-mail regarding your complimentary
MacroScope?
> From: soilfoodweb_at_aol.com
> Reply-To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:54:01 -0500
> To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [compost_tea] Re: cleaning machines
>
> Linda asked how I could object to people being nasty when I have said thi=
ngs
> about Bess, Alms, Neff and others.
>
> Thereıs a difference between facts that show behavior that is not entir=
ely
> honest, and name-calling.
>
> Thereıs a difference between facts and not-supported-by-fact allegation=
s.
>
> Thereıs a difference between facts and lies.
>
> I object when non-specific allegations are made. I asked Linda off-line =
what
> she was objecting to in her post titled, I believe, ³confused and alarm=
ed²,
> because her objections made no sense to me. She has not answered my requ=
est
> for clarification, because, I believe, she has no basis for her statement=
s.
>
> On the other hand, I can document that the paper that Ms. Bess wrote for
> Biocycle about E. coli growing in compost tea was not good science.
>
> Bess did not use compost in the work she did claiming that E. coli grows =
in
> compost tea. In the paper she published she stated that pre-composted
> material was used. In what way is that compost? How can a publication
> purport to be about compost tea when compost wasn't used?
>
> In addition, Bess had no DATA to support her contention that the Growing
> Solutions machine remained aerobic through the entire 24 hour brew. She
> measured oxygen concentrations at 0, 8 and 24 hours. She neglected to me=
asure
> oxygen concentrations during the 16 hours that tea is most likely to go
> anaerobic if aeration is not properly maintained.
>
> The Growing Solutions machine used by Bess has been documented to become
> anaerobic during every brew. The current models of the Growing Solutions
> machines include aerators in the baskets. Hum, do you suppose perhaps a
> problem was recognized and dealt with? But then, where does that leave M=
s.
> Bess? The machine she used goes anaerobic and yet she continues to claim=
that
> the machine did not go anaerobic during her testing.
>
> I have a problem with that discrepancy. Is it nasty of me to point out f=
acts?
> But it doesn't stop there.
>
> The oxygen levels reported in the Bess article were impossible. At the
> elevation and temperatures reported in the Bess paper, oxygen concentrati=
on
> cannot be in the ranges that were reported. Water cannot hold that much
> oxygen at the temperature and elevation reported in the paper. The claim=
s
> that Bess made, and continue to make, that the tea was aerobic through th=
e
> whole brew, are extremely questionable.
>
> If a liquid goes anaerobic for more than a few hours, beneficial fungi,
> protozoa and nematodes will be lost. Compost contains all these organism
> groups, plus bacteria of course, so how can you call something compost te=
a
> where most of the organism groups that exist in compost have been killed?
>
> Based on a machine that produces conditions that allow E. coli and human
> pathogens to have the habitat they need to grow happily, the conclusion f=
rom
> Bess' work has allowed the USDA to attempt to smear all compost tea, i.e.=
,
> that all compost tea should be treated like manure. Do you think perhaps=
that
> the broad and over-arching conclusion from Bess' work was perhaps
> inappropriate?
>
> But, what I am saying are simple facts that you can check out for yoursel=
f.
> If you donıt like facts, are you going to call the truth nasty?
>
> The facts surrounding the Bess paper need to be explained so people under=
stand
> why we face the problems that we do in the world of compost tea.
>
> Will Brinton and others in the USDA attempt to make the case that compost=
tea
> causes E. coli to grow. Bess showed that E. coli can grow when conditio=
ns in
> a culture vessel are right for E. coli to grow. Those are not the condi=
tions
> in actively aerated compost tea machines, however, and to try to make the=
case
> that all compost tea will result in E. coli growth is absolutely wrong.
>
> Letıs move on to Alms, or more correctly, the Growing Solutions machine=
s.
> First of all, thereıs the work published by Bess. Growing Solutions ma=
chines
> have some serious problems if they allow E. coli growth. Perhaps some
> instructions should come with those machines to explain the conditions wh=
ere
> the manufacturer has shown that the machine does not result in E. coli gr=
owth.
> Perhaps a clear explanation of the importance of the aerators in the comp=
ost
> baskets should be required.
>
> But the manufacturer does not provide any such information, nor does the
> manufacturer show any results to offset the data from the Bess article.
>
> On the Growing Solutions website there are data showing a single plate co=
unt
> measurement from several years ago of tea from the machine documented by =
Bess
> to grow E. coli. One test? As if this constitutes anyoneıs definition=
of
> adequate testing to show the benefit from any commercial product. And th=
e
> data are several years old? What, Growing Solutions has never had a bett=
er
> result?
>
> And no one can support the ³species richness-diversity index² used by=
BBC
> Labs, which is what Growing Solutions shows to try to convince people the=
ir
> machines make compost tea. There is no such ecological or biological mea=
sure
> named ³species richness diversity². This is a invented measure, whic=
h might
> be useful, if there were some data to show what it meant. But what does =
it
> mean to have an ³8² or a ³10² or a ³2² index reading? Data f=
rom Dr. Eric
> Nelson at Cornell University shows that the index is meaningless with res=
pect
> to disease.
>
> Any decent microbiologist will tell you that plate counts cannot tell you
> anything realistic about diversity. But thatıs the data that Growing
> Solutions uses to try to convince people that the tea made by the Growing
> Solutions machine is capable of making compost tea. No data on protozoa,
> nematodes, or beneficial fungi.
>
> Growing Solutions recommends 26 pounds of compost to make 100 gallons of
> compost tea in the current version of the Growing Solutions machine. And=
even
> with that surfeit of compost in the machine, the tea doesn't achieve the
> minimum fungal biomass that other tea machines get. Other 100 gallon mac=
hines
> use somewhere between 7 to 14 pounds of compost, and manage to get better
> organism numbers than the Growing Solutions machines.
>
> Growing Solutions tells people their machines can be cleaned in 20 minute=
s
> when in fact, that is a huge under-estimate of the time it takes. Signif=
icant
> bio-films were present and growing on the bottom of the disc diffusers in
> every single Growing Solutions machine that I have ever been invited to l=
ook
> at. It is not easy to get this bio-film off the bottom of the discs. It=
is
> NOT easy to get the discs to pop out. I cannot get the ³quick-connect=
²
> connections to un-screw. There isnıt enough space at the bottom of the=
tank
> for me to get a grip on the part you have to un-screw. I have little han=
ds,
> so I have to get a tool to move the connections, and there isn't room to =
get
> the tool in there easily.
>
> The air bubblers in the compost baskets that are now in every Growing
> Solutions machine start to grow bio-film in the bubbler material. Growin=
g
> Solutions knows that this happens (Iıve pointed it out to them so I kno=
w they
> know, but they then "cut all communication" with me over the fact that I =
have
> pointed out problems with their machine). But, do they tell their client=
s
> that the bubblers have to be cleaned after each brew? No.
>
> And how much time does it take to clean those bubblers? How long do you =
have
> to leave them soak to get the bio-film out of the bubblers? It's more th=
an 20
> minutes.
>
> Between the discs and the bubblers, it is a great deal more time to clean
> their machines than Growing Solutions will tell you. They try to use the
> "short" cleaning time as a sales advantage. But in fact, that is a serio=
us
> mis-representation.
>
> Facts. These are facts, whether you like them or not. Is it nasty to te=
ll
> people about facts?
>
> It is nasty to make non-specific and un-supported statements that attack
> someone else unfairly. It is nasty to make claims that you cannot suppor=
t
> with facts. Back your statements up with facts and then I will listen to=
you.
>
> Just as with Chris, when he showed me the pictures of the pipes, I could =
see
> what he was talking about, and I hope that Bob Norsen will address those
> conditions.
>
> No facts? I ask that the nastiness stop, that the attack stops, as there=
is
> no basis for nastiness or attack.
>
> SFI has data that shows, time after time, that Soil Soup machines do not =
have
> beneficial fungi, protozoa or nematodes in the brown liquid that their
> machines produce. The smell that comes from their machines is sometimes =
so
> overwhelming that it has been known to make people leave the room and
> sometimes the building.
>
> But, Soil Soup has recently made an effort to correct one of the major
> problems with their Bio-Blender. This is not the Soup Kitchen machine, a=
nd a
> clear distinction needs to be made between what they sell in Soup Kitchen=
s and
> what is produced from the Bio-Blenders. The fabric bag for the Bio-Blend=
er
> has been changed. They sent out nylon bags made of a single layer of
> material, so that fungi will not be caught and retained in the bag. The
> fabric bag was also a great place for mildew to grow.
>
> So, the change is a step in the right direction. I applaud the effort. =
I
> still expect that Soil Soup ought to do some testing, some solid,
> scientifically sound testing to show that the machine they sell actually =
makes
> something that will routinely produce the benefits they claim. If they c=
ould
> show that with this improvement that bacteria, fungi, protozoa and nemato=
des
> now survive and flourish in the liquid, then I would not be critical.
>
> But again, facts.
>
> If a claim is made that a machine makes compost tea, should not all the
> beneficial organisms from good compost survive in the tea? If compost is=
not
> used (see Kirk Leonardıs last post about the Soil Soup Kitchens), how c=
an they
> call it compost tea? The organisms are the reason for compost tea perfor=
ming
> the benefits it performs, so how can something that does not contain thos=
e
> organisms give the benefits? To call it compost tea is a mis-representat=
ion.
>
> Data. Show me the data.
>
> When people don't have data to support what they talk about, when people =
have
> to resort to name-calling and twisting what others say, then that's attac=
king,
> and thatıs nasty.
>
> Elaine Ingham
> President, Soil Foodweb Inc.
> SFI Corvallis, OR
> SFI Port Jefferson, NY
> SFI Lismore, NSW, Australia
> SFI Hilversum, The Netherlands
> SFI Cambridge, New Zealand
> SFI Culiacan, Mexico
> www.soilfoodweb.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/compost_tea/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/compost_tea/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Received on Sat Dec 20 2003 - 06:29:30 EST