On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 19:57:48 GMT, ~ janj wrote:

No. Because you just missed the big picture. All of the above was found
out by further RESEARCH! Sheesh.

Jan - you missed my point entirely. What will *further research* learn
about fish food? Sheeeeeesh! I have little faith in research and for good
reasons. There are hundreds of cases like the ones I mentioned.

Totally illogical. I read this as saying, since a few research projects
have been wrong, all research is wrong. *Perhaps even the research that
says the first research is wrong!* Sure hope you're not taking any meds for
anything that ails you, since those meds were created via research.

So YOU believe we should keep the poor research and all the wrong and
sometimes deadly results hidden? Why Jan? What's the point in that?

You know what. I'm not going to discuss something that has nothing to do
with fish food.

My control group, fat and sassy (last years fry) have already all be sold
last spring. They were raised on Catfish and Trout chow with treats of
kitten and puppy chow.

Now thats one heck of a control group. How many were killed and a
aautopsy performed to check actual body fat or look for extraneous
growths and other organs that gained or lost to much. NONE.....so
there is not any basis to claim your staements and findings on. They
are meaningless. I know a few poeple who looked fine too, picture of
health that droppe dover dead, and their main diets were junk food
too.....amazing how looks can certainly fool you. Looks is only
secondary to actual fact finding from microscopic and other processes.
Don't give up yur day job to i run "controled experiments"

Doesn't work that way Carol. Sorry. You'll never get into a science journal
based on that. At the very least one would have to open some of the fish up
and see are them just as fat (yea, I bet they are) and sassy on the inside
as the out side.


No, she won;t but I bet she could be a center fold in Mad Magazine.
They tend to run articles and think along the lines of her so called
experiment.
Same conditions (same tanks and same filters with the same pumps) and same
parent fish Jan. Fresh food right from the Ichabon factory from an Aquarium
store in Nashville. He gets in a fresh load every spring.

Proves nothing at all without FULL precise disections etc afterwards
along with the control group.

But all we have is your say so Carol. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to jump
on the band wagon of one person saying this worked for them when all the
research says other wise, and a lot of people with more money in this hobby
then I'll ever spend in a lifetime follow the research. You can try to
convince the masses, but you're not going to convince me. So have the last
word, as I know you will.

Carol your word does not have much honesty or integrity to it anymore.
It is about like a weather man and the forecast. They say one thng and
something else occurs.

No Jan. I will *not* take offense if a food your fish thrived on left me
with several hundred undersized fry. It just proves to me one more time how
unreliable (and sometimes deadly) *research* can be and often is. What I
will take offense at is being called a drunk, a slut and an idiot (and other
insinuations) because what worked for you or Snooze or Joe Blow didn't work
for me and Jane Doe etc.

Odds are you skimped on feeding the fish the proper amount since your
so concerned with saving money yuy have to resort to feeding cat food
or catfish chow.....I can totally understand why yur fish failed to
thrive ona wellknown and recognized diet. You got to give them the
proper amount and not count the pennies if your gonna commit yourself
to it. Perhaps cheapskate or cheapass ponder would be a better title
foroyou than frugal. Big difference.


Where oh where do yoou come up with the so called atrocities yur
accusiing all these poeple of. I have heard yu called a lot of t hngs
over the years carol, and lady certainly was not one of them nor was
drunk......the folks your fooling with couod not be bothered to use
such penny arsed limp names. Play with the big dogs you get bite, so
yuou should have stayed on the porch, and worked crossword puzzles.

Well I FOR ONE HAVE NEVER EVER CALLED YOU THOSE NAMES OR ANY NAMES! If
you've taken my disagreements/rebuttals as inferring to that, than that is
your problem, and shame on you for even putting MY name in with the likes
of those who do such. ~ jan


I think yu9u owe Jan an appolkogy, not that my opinon means anything
to youo, but out of all th eposts yu made and dissrespect I have never
seen Jan dog cuss anyone nno matter who they were......or what they
said. Abiut all it ever got out of Jan was a PLONK! Perhaps yur
interpretation of a PLONK means something entirely different than what
it means to everyone else. Care to give us an explanatinn Carol? Now I
am not saying Jan and some others robably did not really wanto to leta
few chice words fly, but I do not recall nay Jan may have said to you
that would be deemed profane or harsh!




-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!