Speaking as someone who is reading it, I'm very interested in the
results of Victor's testing. Far more so than in any holy war about
the subject.

I am, too. And I don't consider this a holy war. It's just normal Usenet
discussion.

Look back at the thread. All I said was

"I'd be curious as to whether it works at all, but no, to me, that's not the
point. Or at least, not the only one. To justify the price, it would have to
work faster and better than the usual ways of cycling a tank."

Which I think was a valid point to make to anyone who might be considering
using this stuff, and perfectly civil. Hardly a call for jihad. g

I'd like to see side-by-side comparisons of perhaps three tanks, all
set up identically, with the same fish load.

Nah, a true test would be with straight ammonia. The same amount in each tank.
And repeated more than once, by different researchers.

What do you think of Donald's experiment? I found it very interesting, even if
equipment failure threw in an element of uncertainty. If I'm reading the graph
correctly, he got nitrate readings within a few days, but nitrite continued to
rise after that, and didn't go down to zero until 30 days. He thinks nitrate
test kits actually measure nitrite, too, or something like that. (And the
graph curves are suspiciously similar. You'd expect to see nitrate going up
while nitrite goes down, not both moving in tandem.)


Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/