Testing of Pfieffer field spray and compost starter would be significant because of the potential scale for munincipal, or large scale use. Pfeiffer products are much more relative to bacterial innoculation. Meaning they are bred to be bacterial.
But the preps we are not as concerned with the bacteria, but with the more subtle life force processes, increased bacteria is just a side effect of the working of the preps. Steiner used the analogy in the agriculture lectures that the house is not dirty because it has flies in it; the flies are there because the house is dirty. So the preps dirty up the house a bit, and then the bacteria come. Barrel Compost and Podolonsky 500 could be interesting to test. I am interested in how these results are interpreted, given we take these preps, and then apply them in such minut quantities. As opposed to testing actual compost or soil. Christy ----- Original Message ----- From: Allan Balliett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 6:20 AM Subject: Re:Testing preps? > Pfeiffer Field Spray was formulated by Pfeiffer as an easy way of > doing what compost tea is doing, among other things, was it not? Not > only does it contain the preps, it also has strains of bacteria added > that Pfeiffer personally had concluded were particularly helpful in > promoting biological activity across acreage. > > Since it is so easy to use, I think it would be very worthwhile to > know what Elaine thinks of it as an innoculant and 'what makes it > tick' on the biological level. > > -Allan >
