Jump to content


Forum Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About GrandLocomon

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Perth, WA
  • State


  • Interests
    Mecha, Ranchu / Lionhead Goldfish, Keeping fish as pets for the fun of it, gaming, sunflowers. XD
  1. More like they get replaced each week because they die. Poor darlings.
  2. Ignore the comments of those who don't get the issue. Maybe you need a bigger siphon, and by that I mean one with a larger diameter hose. It will suck water out faster and so will be more likely to pick up the crap. However, if you've got a light substrate; lighter or around the same weight as the crap, a bigger siphon's not going to help because it will just start to siphon out the substrate with the crap, which is just annoying. The other thing to do is once the siphon has started, disconnect the shake-tube part and just use the hose since it will also have a stronger ability to pick up crap that way.
  3. It says ends midnight tonight, so you will. Hopefully my order comes to how much I calculated it This sale's a good excuse to buy a better heater for winter.
  4. They don't care, I totally get that. So long as the money is coming in it could be bottled asbestos (that's a natural mineral after all) mixed with happiness and sunshine for all anyone cares. We both know that testing it would require me to buy the product which I don't trust, and don't support the attitude of the company (you're a funny guy for suggesting it, I give you props for trying). I'd continue, but I'd have to keep reiterating points I made earlier; I know none of my concerns have been, or will be addressed, so I'm done here. Enjoy your placebo / continued observance of regression to the mean / efficacious product.
  5. I have iterated this many times; I want the claims substantiated before I believe them. My question was rhetorical really; what you've told me is akin to me releasing a medicine without providing any evidence it works and telling the populace to prove to me whether and how efficacious it is.
  6. Nice try. I'm not the one making claims, they are. The burden of proof lies with them, not with me. With any claim there is a null hypothesis, however implicit it may be. It is always formulated, however I know it's a waste of time specifying it, or indeed replying to this thread. Why should I conduct experiments on other people's claims? Tell me why I should take on the burden of proof?
  7. What's even better is that the thread has now resorted to humorous statements in attempt to divert attention away from the topic. All I wanted was a shred of valid evidence that the product does anything significant in an aquarium. They couldn't even provide this! So the null hypothesis is still the one I will accept; the product doesn't do anything. A secretive company with an unprofessional website makes bold claims and we all just have to believe. Yeah, right. Sorry that I'm not so naive.
  8. The sad thing is people think this is true. Ignorance is bliss from what I hear.
  9. It's a nice offer, but I'm doubting information you give me will be anything other than anecdotes. I'm happy to be proved wrong however.
  10. The claims provided are baseless; this is one of the issues I have have with this product. The others being no mention of context, effect size or significance of any of these claims. My other issues are the poor presentation and presumably poor quality of what little data is presented. I also take issue with such anecdotal 'evidence' as 'it works for me'; you'd think the company would at least try to back up such wide ranging claims with hard, quality data. I am very concerned by the use of easy life as a trouble-shooting product. How can you be sure you are not experiencing expectation bias or observing a regression to the mean? I'm less concerned with what it actually contains or the specifics of the mechanisms by which it achieves any given claim. They can protect their patents and data collection/analysis methods all they want. They just can't expect everyone to believe their claims 'because we say so, therefore it is'.
  11. It's cool, I'm not going to be upset. Just curious/skeptical is all. It's not like they're dumping it into our drinking water without telling us what it is. I didn't ask for you to do my research, I would never trust you to. I was talking about research of the reading papers variety not actual chemical analysis / experiments. I don't have the time or resources for that. Don't worry, I'm bored. I wouldn't buy their product; I don't like their claims anyway. They could really all be true, since we have no idea of effect size or significance. "100% natural does not contain any chemicals or bacteria" there you go a quote copied and pasted from their page. On the same page as some graphs/tables notably lacking in context. I know they don't like to think of minerals as chemicals, but that's just their marketing. Thanks for the Wikipedia link, I had a good laugh.
  12. It is when used in relation to a product that claims to contain nothing at all.
  13. How do you propose we do self directed research when we do not know what we are looking for; since easy life keeps the contents so hush-hush?
  • Create New...