"~ janj" wrote in message
...
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.
So it's illogical that past research was so poor they gave unsuspecting
women HRT until NEW research proved it was causing so many more cases of
breast cancer they stopped the new research? In your mind it would be
logical to keep prescribing the hormones because of past research? Now
that's illogical to me. So tell us Jan - what magic do you use to tell
which research came to the correct answers? How can we KNOW which research
isn't going to be another WHOOPSIE.... "We made a mistake! Sorry we killed
you with breast cancer (or whatever) with our past research."
I read this as saying, since a few research projects
have been wrong, all research is wrong.
No Jan, stop reading your own agenda into what I'm saying. We're talking
about a lot of research that came to the wrong conclusions over a period of
many years. You seem to think whatever a researcher posts is the TRUTH and
CORRECT! If that were the case there wouldn't been so many drugs pulled off
the market that "research" showed to be safe. And that's just one example.
*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.
Oh yes it does Jan. You claimed RESEARCH proved the koi food...... on and
on...... you used the word research.
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.
Doesn't work that way Carol. Sorry. You'll never get into a science
journal
based on that.
Sorry Jan, the RESEARCHERS who claimed animal fats were deadly and to switch
to (deadly) trans-fats got into the science Journals didn't he Jan? Oh yes,
they did. How many people died of heart disease because of that faulty
research? Just because RESEARCH makes it into a Journal doesn't mean it's
gospel as you seem to think. Are you still eating those deadly trans-fats
Jan or are you accepting the *NEW RESEARCH* that shows how deadly trans-fats
are? Whose conflicting research are you going by now? And what makes you
think some other RESEARCHER wont come up next week and say, "WHOOPSIE we
were wrong about that trout chow." Whose research will you go by then?
Researcher one or researcher two?
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.
Sorry again Jan. Whenever one of my koi dies, and occasionally one does,
there is no fatty liver problem. How do you think I know they had
*internal* contagious ulcers in the later 90s? Remember my old website? I
worked in an animal hospital for years in NY. Autopsy is nothing new to me.
Their parents are 7 and over and all are thriving. And yes Jan, here in TN
our winters are cold so the young fish must have enough FLESH/FAT to carry
them through the winter.
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.
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,
Research said HRT was good for women too Jan. New research shows that was
quite wrong. No one says you should jump on any bandwagon. Just stop
trying to *CENSOR* what's posted here because you believe what some
researcher wrote. That is censorship. You want to silence those who have
had complete success with other feeds.
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.
Jan, STOP reading your own agenda into this. No one is trying to convince
you of anything. I couldn't care less what you feed your fish or if you
have your fish for dinner tonight. All I'm saying is to STOP trying to
censor those of us who have great success with cheaper non specific
overpriced koi foods - that means to stop using some research papers you
read as gospel to silence others. As deadly as trans-fats and HRT is I
wouldn't try to stop you from using them either if you want to believe the
"researchers."
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.
Well I FOR ONE HAVE NEVER EVER CALLED YOU THOSE NAMES OR ANY NAMES!
I didn't say YOU specifically did. What you did do was expect me to blindly
take the research you're going by as being as correct and right as though no
research errors occur, or occur rarely and that is not the case.
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 wouldn't say your name with the same breath I would his.... no worry
there. ;-)
--
ZB....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from
http://www.teranews.com