My tone comes from Terry's own actions where he claimed my guide would kill peoples ants and then claimed that pH had no impact on methylparaben's efficacy (see my guide with chart) all while making even more personal attacks. He claims the concentration I use in my guide is not correct so I posted even more evidence supporting my statements about the concentrations of methylparaben needed and that there will be no noticeable difference between his product and the orders of magnitude cheaper DIY solution.
I have tried to keep my comments focused on his product and to keep it civil while he has made absolutely no effort to do the same.
You admit yourself that the data to back up his claims does not exist and we all know this but he keeps on saying it does but it is a "trade secret".
It is interesting how many people are willing to fight Terry's battles for him when he has still provided no evidence to support any of his claims and I have provided numerous links supporting my positions.
Costs for everyday kitchen utensils, like stock pots, pyrex bowls, and measuring spoons are the same. Everybody has these items available in their kitchen. Your only investment in either activity is time, and since you apparently already value your time more than that of a reputable company's product, bowling water is not that much of an increase in investment.
Your sources, as they are provided in your post, are questionable at best. Your chart on pH effect on preservative efficacy sites references that you do not provide, so the exact context of the chart is impossible to be determined (efficacy in what, makeup, food, drugs, arthropod enthusiest product?). The second figure, from the Journal of Applied Oral Science (?),forces me to make several assumptions since, once again you provide no context for your source. What assumptions I can draw from the limited text is that the chart lists the concentration of methylparaben in (prescription?) drugs on the Brazilian market for use in humans to treat something to do with Oral Science. Again, context in the form of the full article will help with clarification, not to mention show us the methods and more results of the study. So far, with the sources provided, I can draw the conclusion that I, as a human can use methlyparaben in concentrations of around 0.1% to treat something to do with Oral Science (which I am still not clear what Oral Science is, having to do with a mouth or something like oral traditions, but instead of folk tales, villages pass science from one generation to the next) as long as pH of the solution containing the methylparaben is somewhere between 4-8 (but I can't determine if that is even correct because I can not see the references sited in the table). I guess that is some relief if I ever personally engage in oral science. Using these references seems an awful like comparing apples to oranges, and seeing as the subject of this forum are arthropods, not mammals, more relevant and properly cited sources are needed in my opinion.
I also never stated that byFormica does not have the research to support their claims. I speculated that the costs associated with running a proper scientific study on a product for use by hobbiest ant keepers would be prohibitive, and that any research into the product would be recouped by the cost of the product. I also clarified that a business does not have to show "proof" of their claims, instead the burden of proof falls onto the accuser to prove that those claims are false. Like I said, the only claim I see possible of proving false is the claim the byFormica's product supplies supplemental Ca to the ants. Be my guest to invest the copious amounts of money and time into determining that. I am sure byFormica will thank you for doing that research and adjust their product information should you prove them wrong. In your original DIY thread, Terry offered his professional opinion that your methods could prove dangerous/lethal for ant colonies. I am fairly certain he did not announce that it will flat out kill all ants.
Have you thought about the ethical implications of selling 150ml bottles (you can make 25 of his $15 bottles from a gallon of solution) that contain less than 1% of the main active ingredient which you can buy a pound of for $17 shipped to your door?
I would like to see some data saying that his product is some super miracle water before we all give him a pass on this.
What ethical implications? I see a company trying to sell their product for a profit. I think everyone got it in your first thread that you do not like that fact. Here is a simple solution. Make a thread stating your opinion, like you have already done, try to sway people to your opinion in that thread, and do not purchase the product. You do not know the cost of their overhead, so it is not fair assume they are gouging anything. An unethical business practice is selling a generator before a hurricane for 300% market value. Selling a product in a market where there are no/limited competitors for a modest mark up is not. I am sorry if business making a profit on a product they sell is a foreign notion to you, but there is no other country in the world that operates differently. Businesses exist to make a profit.
I am not supporting byFormica or Terry, I am simply pointing out that you are not providing any sources to counteract the claims put forward by byFormica. The links your have provided offer no context, and what assumptions I can make from them lead me to believe they are about use of methylparaben in mammals i.e. humans. I hate using bold font, but apparently the precedence of this thread is to use them when you think you are making a cheeky point!
Edited by CallMeCraven, April 25 2017 - 4:07 PM.
This topic is locked
