Moe.Red
- 5,044
- 313
So what I'm doing here is trying to move away from anecdotal evidence even if it is statistically relevant and post actual results that anyone can see and determine for themselves if UV is worth it.We both would like to see more peer review studies. We give away a lot of gear to do small studies. And someone earlier was saying he does sell products, I don't know. And yes, he studies nutrients and the whole agriculture aspect, we don't. We specialize in pure UV research. We do with with Texas A&M and others who use our lamps studying agriculture on the whole and the effects of UV on plants. My bias would be in "my product vs their product". There is no "$x hours works better than $y hours" bias, or "indica can handle more than sativa" bias. Those have no financial bearing on either of us, those are simply data points, drawn from different data.
We do real research (at differing levels of quality) but yes TONS of information is anecdotal, but it is anecdotal based on input from hundreds or thousands of people, not dozens, so even that information has merit. With flu, the same was true for losing your sense of taste and smell. They began saying it was a symptom well before any study was published, because when the anecdotes are that numerous and all agree with each other, the conclusions tend to be valid.
Here is an opportunity for you to help yourself by helping me. Let's step away from theory here for a moment and please tell us what you expect from the upcoming cannabinoid reveal and what we could / should be doing differently, even if based on anecdotes you have stored away in your brain.
Please help to guide this test.