On 30/9/07 09:26, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:23:25 +0100, Sacha
wrote:


If they bought seeds off the same shelves - or the virtual shelves -
available to the ordinary gardener, then the results were typical, surely?

No, because as somebody said earlier, some places look after their seeds
better
than others. It's important that the places where Which bought the seeds is
also
identified.

I don't think anyone disputes that. But I don't think it's correct to
suggest that the study is meaningless if only one packet of seeds per
producer was tested, because that is what most consumers would buy. The
test wasn't for the trade which buys thousands of seeds but for the consumer
who buys one or two.


The point of the testing is simply to do the testing. I would think Which
considers that to be their only brief. After that consumers can make up
their own minds as to whether to buy seeds from x, y or z, or whether to mix
them up from a, b and c. What the test has shown is that people buying
seeds from 15 different sources may well find that the seed is dead and
then, if they have a poor germination rate they're better informed to make a
fuss about it with the seedsmen.

What it showed is that there is a problem with delphinium seed especially as
last year we had packet of dead delphinium seeds from Plants of Distinction,
one
that Which? rated high.

I made up my mind to cancel my Which? subscription after more than 30 years, I
still have a subscription to the Dutch CA. Guess why? :-)

It showed a problem with a lot more than Delphinium seeds. They tested veg.
too and various other flowering plants.

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'