Originally Posted by pdqaltair
I'm sorry if I irritate anyone when I dismiss anecdotal evidence. It is useful in developing a thesis and checking reasonableness. But scientific method is like that; any time I start any sort of testing, whether in my real life or this hobby, the first thing I MUST do is isolate all opinions I may hold at the start. Often I'm most pleased when my favorite product--or at least the product I expected to do well--doesn't; it means I was not reporting my preconceived notions and perhaps that the method was sufficiently blind and well controlled.
No, I have not done enough testing to say it is a deception and I should not have implied that; it's a forum post, not an article. In fact, I think it makes good sense, based upon some literature data related to HVAC. The dosing rates even seem about comparable, somewhere in the low ppm range. I am certain it is orders of magnitude less effective than direct applied treatments and thus would be used in combination..
You didn't irritate me
Its is just sometimes people look at things differently.
My previous profession of 30 years as a chef required that I was not so analytical approach oriented. It absolutely would have stifled creativity as a culinarian. Sometimes my approach still reverts back to that line of thinking.
If I had had to have every new creation proved out ahead of time, I would have been a failure.
I understand the importance for knowing why this works...I want to know too.