How factual are your facts? Biased information and tips for success

[FoNz]

How factual are your facts?
Biased information and tips for success
​

A recent conversation inspired me to put together a post on a subject that is very relevant to the shared interests on this forum. That subject is the journey of fact-finding and the obstacles an individual faces.

To illustrate this point, we will look at information about a product that I have used and enjoyed before - ProMix by Premier Tech Horticulture.

As a disclaimer, I am a biologist who's education encompasses a significant amount of relevant information to the horticultural and agricultural fields with no personal interest or relationships with profit-based ventures in those fields. I do have a bias towards inspiring personal growth and critical thinking in individuals and consider myself a lifelong learner.

To the point, not all information is good information and a very large portion of information is guided, inspired or directly produced by individuals with conflicts of interest. That is to say, the information they have is biased.

The Representative and the Website
​

An individual stated that a ProMix representative suggested that pH balancing your nutrient solution is unneeded and claims success with consistent unbalanced pH waterings. According to the ProMix site they have lime to buffer the pH of the soil, while peat is the acidic compound. These materials serve multiple purposes, but almost explicitly among them is to pH balance the solutions you feed your plant (be that filtered water or nutrient based).

I didn't have to look far for their page on the subject. From the companies website on growing medium pH (link here):

"Considering the water analysis (water alkalinity), the medium's buffering capacity, residual lime and the optimum pH for the plant species, there is a considerable selection of soluble fertilizers to choose from. Most fertilizer companies have charts that help in choosing the right product. Some fertilizers are potentially basic (B) and others are potentially acidic (A) as indicated on their label. These values give a good idea of the amount of acidic or basic ions that will be neutralized. A or B expresses the amount of CaCO3 in ppm or in kg / ton. The higher the number, the greater the fertilizer’s potential acidity or basicity."

That is a good example of intentionally ambiguous language with a commercialized re-identification of pH designed to encourage a consumer to buy specific products (likely premier tech horticulture group brands among them). Nothing about their material suggests clarity or information transparency. The website doesn't flat out lie - that I can tell - and it doesn't suggest that pH balancing is unnecessary like the representative did. The way the information is presented does serve a specific purpose though, getting you to buy their products.

The Conclusion
​

So let's tie this narrative together, based on the information gathered in this analysis, is the information unbiased? The answer is easily no, which should not be a surprise.

In the case of the representative, insisting that pH balancing is an unneeded step will not have immediate negative effects for a promix user because it has materials designed to control the medium's (and thereby the solution passing through said medium) pH. Overtime this lime/peat combo will become less effective leading to one of two outcomes, amending the medium or buying a fresh bag. A second consequence is that mediums that do not have as much of their mass committed to pH balancing compounds will seem inferior if the grower indeed does not manually monitor or balance the pH of the solutions being introduced to the medium, as per the representatives suggestion.

To follow that analysis up we have the company site's literature. At this point even the many casual home gardeners I have talked to are aware of pH and it's importance to healthy plants of different kinds. The company's information does not conflict with this information, but it does confound the topic through unclear language and provides a simple to understand alternative to confusion - an A/B organization for fertilizers to use with your medium. The information is specifically designed to guide you into buying a specific product and is therefor biased information.

This is not ludicrous, shady or unexpected behavior from a vendor - it doesn't mean the representative or company are "bad". I would even consider Premier Tech Horticulture and their brands reputable. The fact is that they make money and stay in business by selling their products. However, the information used to this end when interpreted without the full picture can lead to false conclusions that could cause novice (or even experienced) gardeners trouble. This gets to key of this post.

A tremendous amount of research is funded and/or influenced by private interests. Keep this in mind when consuming any material and think about who stands to gain from what you are reading. The best way to protect yourself from misinformation is to develop your own critical thinking skills and to recognize red flags when gathering information.

Many people have good points but they are seldom the only good points. In short - stay skeptical, aware and have an open (and thoughtful) mind.

 

[Chris Scorpio]

10 different people will give you 27.5 different ideas

Lol

That is life and free thinking humans

But very good info you posted my friend

 

[InTheShed]

almost explicitly among them is to pH balance the solutions you feed your plant

I have to disagree with some of your post and you are adding your own biases as well. The rep never said the additives were to pH balance the solutions. As a matter of fact, he said the exact opposite.

Additionally, you are using my summary as the basis for your post, which cannot be considered the sum total of what he said. Nor did I find that post from their website ambiguous. It's reinforced by what the rep said in his email: "If you use a fertilizer that has a high potential acidity (which mostly ammonium nitrogen form), this will cause the growing medium pH to drop."

He did not say it was unnecessary for only a promix user to pH balance his nutrient solution, he said soil and soil-less. Anything non-hydro. I could go on, but I will leave it to each grower to decide what to do.

Thanks for posting this though. It's always good to get another opinion on the subject!

 

[Chris Scorpio]

Interesting

Was not aware this was in response to a previous post, question or thread

I vote for @InTheShed

 

[FoNz]

Lime, in either form used by promix, is used to raise pH. Peat has a significantly low pH around 4.4 and is used to lower pH. Together they produce a large mass of acidic and basic compounds that don't directly neutralize each other and therefor act to stabilize pH.

With regard to ambiguity, potential acidity is an ambiguous uncommonly used way of saying pH (bacisity isn't even used in common lexicon). Even using the A/B symbols are a form of branding something they would otherwise be unable to brand (pH). These are examples of using unique sounding terminology to set one set of information apart from other sets, the purpose to make one set of information seem better and therefor be more profitable for vendor.

 

[Chris Scorpio]

 

[FoNz]

As requested here are some helpful pieces.

Merriam-Webster's definition of Editorial (n) - a newspaper or magazine article that gives the opinions of the editors or publishers. also : an expression of opinion that resembles such an article. (Opinions were acknowledged and noted in my first reply, link to definition)

Resource on common agricultural amendments. Peat is on page 2, states the aforementioned information on pH including even it's use in conjunction with limestone (lime).

Link for further learning on interactions of Acids, Bases, and Buffers. Both free and interactive, regrettably the plant biology section is disappointing.

A useful site in lieu of buying an overpriced text book, not complete and doesn't get into the roles of membrane proteins but a useful (and visual) guide to root uptake. It skips over the incredibly relevant nitrogen uptake via active transport but this secondary site touches on that.

 

[InTheShed]

Just to make it clear, he stated:

1. Ideal pH range for mineral soil is 6.0-6.5. Soil-less growing media, such as PRO-MIX, have an ideal pH range of 5.5-6.0.

2. However, pH of nutrient water is irrelevant to the pH of any soil or growing media. It is the alkalinity of nutrient water and the potential acidity/basicity of the fertilizer(s) that influence the pH of the growing medium and root zone. For example, if the alkalinity of nutrient water is moderate or high, pH of growing medium will rise over time.

a. Plant roots are electrically charged and must maintain a neutral balance.
b. For ammonium nitrogen (NH4) fertilizers, plants release of hydrogen ions to take up NH4. Hydrogen released is essentially acid and this drives pH down.
c. For nitrate (NO3) form of nitrogen in fertilizers, plant exchange hydroxyl ions for NO3 uptake, which causes growing medium pH to rise.
d. Alkalinity (CACO3) is essentially dissolved limestone. The higher the alkalinity of water, the greater tendency to raise pH of growing medium over time.

3. It is more important to keep track of the pH of the growing medium than the pH of the nutrient solution we feed the plants.

 

[FoNz]

I came to this community because it is vibrant and full of lovely, unique, amazingly talented and intelligent individuals.

 

[InTheShed]

Moving on, you haven't said why his statement is blatantly false. Saying it is doesn't tell us anything. And it isn't contradicted by any statements he made. He says the content of the nutrient solution can cause the pH of the medium to rise or fall over time. Is this untrue?

We may or may not be being misled, but if you think his science is faulty, post the rebuttal to his reasons in my original thread. I'd be glad to get back to him with your reasons to say he's mistaken, and see how he responds.

 

[Marzbadrock]

I love a debate! No I'm not here to argue. I do not PH my water/feed. Ive checked my ph before watering, usually around 4, soil ph 6.3'ish. That's just me though!

 

[FoNz]

There is nothing wrong with finding success in that method, Marzbadrock. As stated in the my previous content there are many ways for pH to be balanced, not all requiring nutrient solution balancing.

Thanks for stopping in to contribute.

 

[Marzbadrock]

I can tell ya this fonz, I'm sure the 420 community welcomes you with open arms. Honestly you were coming off a bit brash though, words are words. Everyone can interpret them a thousand different ways whether or not it was put forth as such. Intentional or not everyone should try not to take jabs at community members, especially well liked n respected ones. Hope to see you around the forums!

 

[FoNz]

Thanks Marz.

 

[FoNz]

I can tell ya this fonz, I'm sure the 420 community welcomes you with open arms. ...Hope to see you around the forums!

Also, I'm on almost every day checking in on people's grows and reading posts when I'm not in the lab or otherwise busy (like with my actual plants). You have a grow going right now?

 

[Marzbadrock]

Unfortunately no grow journal on my side, with getting my new facility operational I just don't have the time to put forth. Once things quite back down I'll be firing one up, lots of breeding, trying qb's, showing off the new grow. For now I just hop around to others journals n visit, try help newb out here n there, shit like that!

 

[FoNz]

Hell yeah brother,
Well when you get around to it I'll keep my eye open for it, sounds like you'll have the operation I'd want if I had the space/could afford it.

 

[Emilya Green]

I have to weigh in on this now. I am also in the camp that believes that the rep from Promix was wrong and if you remember my comments in the thread, he couldn't give a straight answer if his life depended on it. I got chased off for that comment by the way and no longer felt welcome commenting in the thread.
Fonz is correct that in a soil such as this with positive and negative buffers, much like FFOF, many people can get by without adjusting their pH. Some people just have good water or have found a successful mix of rain and tap water, and the nutrient line that they have chosen to use and at the levels they use it, they manage to keep the pH within the range of the buffers. Good for them. These people are lucky.
Fonz did explain the science behind his opinion above, but apparently it was lost or ignored in the translation. I agree with his conclusions... that as long as you are using the promix system, you can get away with ignoring the pH, provided your water is not terribly out of the range and the rep admitted that this would break down the soil's ability to do this consistently over time.
As soon as you start mixing and matching... using different soils or different nutrient lines, it will be very easy to get in trouble by following his terrible advice to ignore the pH. Using different soils and trying not to adjust pH, or trying to use other nutrients with specific pH levels necessary to break apart the bonds, without adjusting the pH is just asking for trouble... yet there was a thread telling anyone who reads it, including newbies that can not understand the science yet, that it was OK to not pH. Not just OK, but not necessary. This bad advice could be harmful to grows other than the specific example spoken to in this thread and because of that, it needed to be debated.
There is a lot of opinion being promoted as fact out here in the growing world. Some of it is more harmful than others. Telling people not to flush, not to adjust pH, to never use nutes at their full potential, to never uppot... all of these common pieces of bad advice are contrary to known horticultural science and I will argue against these practices every time I hear them. There are as many ways to grow this weed as there are grow experts. If it works for you, by all means, do what you will. Be very careful however when you offer advice intended for the entire growing community to be sure that what you are advising is applicable in all cases. Those newbies you are leading down your rosy path may not get the same results that you did because of some minor difference between your working grow and theirs.... such as the base soil that you are using or a different nutrient line.
I spoke up too on that original thread as well as the flushing thing and I got shouted down. My knowledge and my opinions were not being heard nor did they seem welcome. When I realized the political climate in both of those threads, I gave up.
Kudos to Fonz for standing up and stating his learned opinion on this matter. In my opinion he, nor I, was trying to be insulting, we just simply can see through the marketing hype that was being promulgated in this original thread and know that pH is usually important for a successful grow. If you have a system that allows you to ignore it, good.... but lets not promote this as a method that will work for everyone... it simply will not.
If saying this offends certain members to the point that they have to take it personally, that is sad, but such is the nature of debate in this PC society we have found ourselves in. I have been blocked, attacked, been complained about to moderators and had members quit simply because I strongly stated my opinion in their threads. Such is the nature of online forums in the 21st century. If you want to cite controversial subjects, expect to be challenged. If my facts don't match yours, you will need to defend your position if I see you putting out nonsense. I apologize in advance, but I am not PC. I clearly state my opinions and don't care if that triggers someone. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

 

[FoNz]

Wow Emilya, thanks for taking the time to weigh in like that. I admire your strength and honesty.

Funny, these awesome plants we grow wouldn't have stood a chance at being legalized in my state if people didn't start speaking out with that kind of strength. Really changed the tone of my night for the better.

Thanks again.

 

[Aroxol]

So you’re all saying I have to water?

Ugh, I knew I was missing something!

I don’t need a reply btw, I know im an idiot, no science needed

Just like to add some levity