On 28/9/07 15:22, in article
, "Des Higgins"
wrote:

On Sep 28, 3:10 pm, Sacha wrote:
snip
For those who haven't
read the article's link that I posted, the tests on the seed viability are
not the whole of the report. It also comments on the range offered and the
info in the catalogues, for example and it coves 15 seedsmen.
This morning's radio feature remarked that the best way to get good,
reliable seed is to collect your own but it did not go into the F1 issue
with that.


that is all fair enough; as I said, I have bought crap seeds but the
big suppliers are usually fine.

Did you read it to see which seedsmen they reviewed? Some ARE the biggest
suppliers, such as Suttons, Mr Fothergill, Thompson & Morgan, Dobie's,
Unwin's, Chilterns and some are smaller, including what was the HDRA. I
think T&M came out on top.

--
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.'

On 28/9/07 16:19, in article
, "Des Higgins"
wrote:

On Sep 28, 3:03 pm, "Uncle Marvo"
wrote:
In reply to Des Higgins ) who wrote this in
. com, I, Marvo, say :

Ok ok; you have me there; to be honest, it could have been the Goat
and Fascist or possible even the Faggot and Queen's Head

You're the only other chap I know who's been to the Goat and Fascist.

The other one was Hercule Poirot.

He was an awful man with drink taken. He would arrive in and sit at
the end of the bar and leer at Maureen in his durty foreign way that
he had and ask for a creme de menthe and a half of Old Speckled
Partridge and then wink at Maureen and ask for a "queeeek wan my
leetle Brassica" and she would thump the drinks down on the counter
and say "you can take that durty foreign talk home with you if you do
not behave like everyone else" and he would drink about 15 of them all
night and eventually smell like toothpaste and stale beer and start
singing these Belgian drinking songs with lewd actions and then fall
asleep and stagger out the door at closing time. Or I think it was
him; either that or Ernest Hemmingway.

Des

If he was full of bull it was Hemingway.

--
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.'

On 28/9/07 17:14, in article ,
"Robert (Plymouth)" remove my other
hobby to reply wrote:
snip

We get our association seeds from Kings and they always seem ok except for
parsnips this year.... but then that's what parsnip seed are like sometimes


Which got only 23% of their parsnip seed from Kings to germinate.

--
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.'

In message , Malcolm
writes
Did they buy the seeds
off the shelf or by mail order?
They should have tested both batches of mail
order and off the shelf.

Why? Are you suggesting that they will be different? That's a serious
accusation if so.

Seeds sold off the shelf are stored in rather warm conditions. This may
prejudice viability, especially for those sold not sealed in foil, as is
the case for some of the smaller seed merchants.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

On 28/9/07 15:58, in article ,
"echinosum" wrote:


Sacha;750615 Wrote:
This is of interest to all those who buy seeds, both veg. and flowers:
http://tinyurl.com/yq6fd4

Apparently, several suppliers have been found to have dead seeds in
the
packets and some of them in very high numbers, too.
I read a report of this in a newspaper which said they had tested "400
seeds" from each supplier. I think this means they tested about 8
packets of seeds from each supplier. I think that is far too small a
sample in order to decide which are the rogues and which are the
reliable suppliers.

The fact that who were the rogues in relation to "flower seeds" had
very little correlation with who were the rogues in relation to
"vegetable seeds" suggests to me that the results had a substantial
random factor arising from it being a poorly designed experiment of
little statistical significance.



Could it reflect the conditions in which each is grown - flower or veg., I
mean? What the trial doesn't reveal is who supplied the suppliers,
themselves or outside sources.

--
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.'

On 28/9/07 22:02, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:18:47 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 28/9/07 15:22, in article
, "Des Higgins"
wrote:

On Sep 28, 3:10 pm, Sacha wrote:
snip
For those who haven't
read the article's link that I posted, the tests on the seed viability are
not the whole of the report. It also comments on the range offered and the
info in the catalogues, for example and it coves 15 seedsmen.
This morning's radio feature remarked that the best way to get good,
reliable seed is to collect your own but it did not go into the F1 issue
with that.


that is all fair enough; as I said, I have bought crap seeds but the
big suppliers are usually fine.

Did you read it to see which seedsmen they reviewed? Some ARE the biggest
suppliers, such as Suttons, Mr Fothergill, Thompson & Morgan, Dobie's,
Unwin's, Chilterns and some are smaller, including what was the HDRA. I
think T&M came out on top.

Did you find it odd that the plants with poor flower seed germination
percentages were delphiniums in all four cases? It made me wonder in Which?
was
to blame, unless all four companies get their seed from the same source.
Unwins, Mr Fothergills, Simpsons and Edwin Tucker are the four poor
germination
companies.

The only poor germination seeds we have had are from the RHS annual handout of
seeds.

I've pretty much said this in my answer to Stewart. For the tests to have
any real 'power' you'd need to know if the e.g. failed Delphiniums all came
from one source. Of course, from the pov of the consumer that's almost
unimportant because they just buy packets of seeds and trust them to be
okay.
--
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.'

In article , Martin
writes

After buying a camera that Which? recommended as the best, the results
indicated
to me that the testers were colour blind and probably dead from the neck up.
Which?'s own marketing techniques are hypocritical.


I thought the same about their best buy microwave and washing machine!
After all the time I took to research what they recommended I wished I
had not bothered!
I'm sure Edwin Tucker seeds are going to be really pleased about this
negative publicity!

Comparing the best ones and perhaps the cheaper not so good ones I would
hazard a guess that yo can afford to get lower germination rates of some
plants if they are a damned sight cheaper to buy in the first place!

Janet
--
Janet Tweedy
Dalmatian Telegraph
http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk

In article , Mary Fisher
writes

"Rod" wrote in message
oups.com...

So it's not at all as simple as the Which report seems to suggest.

It rarely is.

I gave up on Which? decades ago.

Mary




I bought it right from issue 1 then stopped buying it a few years back
when it became a magazine. However a friend lent me her copy late last
year and it is gradually learning by its mistakes and going back to
being what it ought to be, a horticultural version of the Normal Which.

--
Janet Tweedy
Dalmatian Telegraph
http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk

On 29/9/07 08:09, in article , "Malcolm"
wrote:

snip
I don't see how it can possibly be called an "experiment". It wasn't,
and nor did it need any kind of statistical significance applying to it.
It was a simple test of a product (seeds) on behalf of the consumer,
doing exactly what the consumer does, buying some seeds and sowing them.
And, of course, it is up to the consumer (and the seed selling
companies) how much notice they take of it.

I think that sums it up perfectly, Malcolm. It's a consumer magazine so it
behaved as a consumer would. The report makes interesting reading, not just
from the seed viability pov, which is what has aroused so much interest and
attention.
--
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.'

In message , Malcolm
wrote

When Which test washing machines, they don't test hundreds of them, but
take a single example just as would the average shopper. I take a
computer magazine which does comparative tests. They test a single
example of equipment from each manufacturer. It's up to the latter to
make sure that their products are reliable enough to allow for this
kind of minimal sampling.

When you have researched something yourself and then taken a look at a
Which report you may find them sadly lacking in real world detail. They
often fall into the trap where a piece of equipment with, say, 100
features detailed on the box must be much better than equipment with
only 50 features. In reality the user will only use 10 of the features -
the rest being pointless gimmicks.

Many years ago, in two reviews I read they scored one machine/box much
higher than another whereas the two boxes were made in the same factory
with identical electronics but just with a different name on the front
panel.

--
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In message , Malcolm
wrote

When Which test washing machines, they don't test hundreds of them, but
take a single example just as would the average shopper. I take a computer
magazine which does comparative tests. They test a single example of
equipment from each manufacturer. It's up to the latter to make sure that
their products are reliable enough to allow for this kind of minimal
sampling.

When you have researched something yourself and then taken a look at a
Which report you may find them sadly lacking in real world detail. They
often fall into the trap where a piece of equipment with, say, 100
features detailed on the box must be much better than equipment with only
50 features. In reality the user will only use 10 of the features - the
rest being pointless gimmicks.

Many years ago, in two reviews I read they scored one machine/box much
higher than another whereas the two boxes were made in the same factory
with identical electronics but just with a different name on the front
panel.

--
Alan


'Somebody' knew 'somebody' over a drink at the 19th hole? ;-)

Mike


--
www.rneba.org.uk for the latest pictures of the very first reunion and
Inaugural General Meeting. Nothing less than a fantastic success.
The Royal Naval Electrical Branch Association.
'THE' Association if you served in the Electrical Branch of the Royal Navy
www.rneba.org.uk to find your ex-Greenie mess mates
www.iowtours.com for all ex-Service Reunions. More being added regularly
"Navy Days" Portsmouth 25th - 27th July 2008. RN Shipmates will have a Stand

On 29/9/07 09:33, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 22:29:43 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 28/9/07 22:02, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:18:47 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 28/9/07 15:22, in article
, "Des Higgins"
wrote:

On Sep 28, 3:10 pm, Sacha wrote:
snip
For those who haven't
read the article's link that I posted, the tests on the seed viability
are
not the whole of the report. It also comments on the range offered and
the
info in the catalogues, for example and it coves 15 seedsmen.
This morning's radio feature remarked that the best way to get good,
reliable seed is to collect your own but it did not go into the F1 issue
with that.


that is all fair enough; as I said, I have bought crap seeds but the
big suppliers are usually fine.

Did you read it to see which seedsmen they reviewed? Some ARE the biggest
suppliers, such as Suttons, Mr Fothergill, Thompson & Morgan, Dobie's,
Unwin's, Chilterns and some are smaller, including what was the HDRA. I
think T&M came out on top.

Did you find it odd that the plants with poor flower seed germination
percentages were delphiniums in all four cases? It made me wonder in Which?
was
to blame, unless all four companies get their seed from the same source.
Unwins, Mr Fothergills, Simpsons and Edwin Tucker are the four poor
germination
companies.

The only poor germination seeds we have had are from the RHS annual handout
of
seeds.

I've pretty much said this in my answer to Stewart. For the tests to have
any real 'power' you'd need to know if the e.g. failed Delphiniums all came
from one source.

Yes I agree.

Of course, from the pov of the consumer that's almost
unimportant because they just buy packets of seeds and trust them to be
okay.

There needs to be a response from the seed companies.

I'll be surprised if there isn't! Suttons have a trial garden down here so
it will be interesting to hear what they have to say about failure rates
from their own experiences.


--
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.'

On 29/9/07 09:58, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 08:09:45 +0100, Malcolm
wrote:


In article , echinosum
writes

Sacha;750615 Wrote:
This is of interest to all those who buy seeds, both veg. and
flowers:
http://tinyurl.com/yq6fd4

Apparently, several suppliers have been found to have dead seeds in
the
packets and some of them in very high numbers, too.
I read a report of this in a newspaper which said they had tested "400
seeds" from each supplier. I think this means they tested about 8
packets of seeds from each supplier. I think that is far too small a
sample in order to decide which are the rogues and which are the
reliable suppliers.

But that's to suggest, as Martin does, that Which should be carrying out
a statistically significant test taking large samples from each supplier
and of each plant.

Believe it or not in the days when Which? did reliable testing it is exactly
what they did for this sort of thing. This was the reason why the subscription
fees were high.

But, as I understand it, this isn't, and never has
been, Which's approach. That kind of testing is for the seed producers
to carry out. Which behave as the ordinary shopper (in this case,
gardener) does. They acquired a few packets from each source and tested
them. Actually, 400 seeds is quite a lot for some plants. The commoner
veg like lettuces and carrots often have as many seeds as that in a
packet, but many have much less than that, down to a few tens or
sometimes only 10-20. The Organic Gardening delphiniums, for example,
have 65 seeds for one variety and 38 for another, so Which have tested 8
or 10 packets.

When Which test washing machines, they don't test hundreds of them, but
take a single example just as would the average shopper.

because mass produced objects like washing machines have been quality
controlled
by the manufacturer. They should all have the same level of quality.
What you buy is the same as what left the factory. In the case of seeds what
you
buy isn;t necessarily in the same condition it was when it left the seed
producer

I take a
computer magazine which does comparative tests. They test a single
example of equipment from each manufacturer. It's up to the latter to
make sure that their products are reliable enough to allow for this kind
of minimal sampling.

The fact that who were the rogues in relation to "flower seeds" had
very little correlation with who were the rogues in relation to
"vegetable seeds" suggests to me that the results had a substantial
random factor arising from it being a poorly designed experiment of
little statistical significance.

I don't see how it can possibly be called an "experiment". It wasn't,
and nor did it need any kind of statistical significance applying to it.
It was a simple test of a product (seeds) on behalf of the consumer,
doing exactly what the consumer does, buying some seeds and sowing them.
And, of course, it is up to the consumer (and the seed selling
companies) how much notice they take of it.

In the case of seeds the results are meaningless. The history of the seeds is
also important.
This is one of the reasons I no longer subscribe to Which?

This is a proper independent test of a camera
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp885/ compare this to the test of the
same
camera done by Which? and wonder why Which? bothered.

Compare the conclusion with Which?'s conclusion and wonder if they both tested
the same camera http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp885/page18.asp

Note "Red / Cyan can appear over saturated, can 'dominate' an image"

The result of this is that almost no photos of flowers produce realistic
results. Campanilla appeared pink instead a deep blue.

But but but - seeds either come up or they don't. It isn't a matter of
subjectivity in terms of personal preference, how you see blues or reds etc.
They live and sprout or die and don't.
--
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.'

On 29/9/07 22:17, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 20:17:03 +0100, Malcolm
wrote:


In article , Martin
writes

In the case of seeds the results are meaningless. The history of the seeds
is
also important.

So what do you know about the history of the seeds that you buy?

I know where and how I bought them, how long I had them before I used them.

The question is what did Which? who claim to be experts in testing know or
care?

I think there's a bit of confusion about what Which were doing. They were
being you or me or anyone buying seeds. If anyone buys seeds off the shelf
today for sowing in two week's time, they do NOT know how those seeds have
been kept, how old they are, how fresh they are etc. Nor do you if you buy
off the shelf.
Which sent the seeds to a lab which treated all seeds in the same way, which
is probably the only way in which they differed from the average gardener in
Hampshire who will not be doing the same as his counterpart in Scotland. It
was the only way to get a fair result, also. YOU might know more about your
seeds than many do, especially beginners. And given that sales of vegetable
seeds have risen very considerably in the last few years, perhaps it's
appropriate for beginners to have some guidance.
--
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.'

In article , Martin
writes


Watney's Red Barrel bitter experience?


Goodness that's a name from the past isn't it?

When I worked part time as a mere slip of a thing in Brighton Top Rank,
Red Barrel was for the young-go-ahead's and Worthington E for the
'sophisticated over 21s

On the other hand some people drank "light and bitter" or even "black
and tans"..................


Janet
--
Janet Tweedy
Dalmatian Telegraph
http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk