Super Thrive

DubB83

Well-Known Member
This is not productive........
Agreed, just seems like someone likes to beat a dead horse.

Again I ask you what I say that is misinformation? Please point that out to me so others reading this thread don't get duped.

I don't feel that anything I have posted is incorrect, but I'm open to reason.

This is not a pissing match Dr. Greenhorn.

I'll remind you one more time this is an organics section and this product is not organic as per the OP. To get off topic and verbally attack me without addressing the topic or proving a point is a waste of posting space and a sign of immaturity.

Again, I do not claim to be a weed baron or guru of any sort, but I know what is organic and what is not simply because I do my research on it.

Really you need to chill out, this is supposed to be a positive growing environment and to each their own growing style. I believe we have the right to disagree.

Speaking of organic buds, here is one I'm looking forward to tasting soon!
 

islandgrower

Active Member
i went abit nuts with it one time and my girls went abit crazy hard to explain but it as you say read the directions, i mean if it was cool to add it all it would say, but its not, hope people trust my word, am one of these people that has to press the button when it says DO NOT PRESS lol...
loool sounds like a personal problem :bigjoint:



I use superthrive when i fert my plants, it doesn't make a huge difference it just keeps them healthy.
 

Titan4jah

Well-Known Member
dub, instead of growing, you should dabble in politics cause with all this propaganda (misinformation) and bullshit you try to have us believe, your halfway there.and on a side note, if i posted the kind of pictures your posting, i would be ashamed of myself.and don't come back with some lame story how your encapacitated cause a good bunch of us are. so leave your sad stories to yourself.

ive read alot of dubs posts and i can say that he does in fact KNOW what hes taling about...and you mister redhorn sound like a :dunce:
 

SimpleSimon

Well-Known Member
Well i better get in on this, seems like there is some good action flying around.

I would just like to stir the pot:

You can't prove the SuperThrive isn't organic because they don't release the recipe. Simple as that. OH, and just because some "For Profit" organization is stamping some things organic and not others. Doesn't mean a thing.

coffee is a great example of this. The USDA organic cert doesn't apply to LOTS of coffee that is in fact organic. The countries that grow that coffee can't get the pesticides, chem ferts, or herbicides, but because they don't pay into the USDA they arn't certifide. Then the ingnorant consumers says "oh its not organic becuase said profit organization says it isn't" You only belive what is told to you by profiterring third party.

Okay go!
 

SimpleSimon

Well-Known Member
knowone can prove that it is or isn't organic because they don't release the recipe.

Keep arguing about it though, i find it amusing.
 

DubB83

Well-Known Member
Do some research on it, it contains synthetic auxins. I assure you that you are confused a bit on this issue.

Ok, lets play it from your point of view but flip it. I know that Thrive Alive is organic because, A. it is OMRI Listed and B. I know the ingredients because the company is honest enough to let the consumer know what their plants are about to consume. Unless there is a large OMRI conspiracy.

Now this brings about the point of organics. Knowing where the ingredients come from. If it is important to you that your going organic then why not know everything about everything you are feeding the plants?

Lets say in todays day and age an electronics manufacturing company cannot get UL Listing, ISO 9000 Compliance, and RoHs Certified then they will not be able to compete on the global market where those things are not only desired but needed to ensure quality and safety.

Your argument that they simply chose not to get this certification done does not hold water as it would bring in more business than shun. Those brandings are a cost bust they work out to be investments in reality. We are not talking about 3rd world coffee beans we are talking about good old American fertilizers produced in California.

As everyone already stated, plants all work the same. So we no there is no mistery juju juice ingredient that makes your plant explode that could be missed by all other companies, including one of the companies on the technological edge of nutrient advancement. Bottom line there is a specific list of general ingredients and the question is over how many are directly organically derived or organically based, or lab reproduced.

Those are the concerns of an organic grower.
 

DubB83

Well-Known Member
Here is a reference you might find interesting:


tapla said:
From forums.Gardenweb.com
Not all are much enamored of Superthrive, and it DOES contain ingredients that WILL hurt your plants if overused. It contains synthetic auxin, the same growth regulator that was used in defoliants in Viet Nam. This question arises soo often, that I saved a synopsis of an experiment I've repeated 4 times, with some loose controls in place. You may, or may not find it interesting, but I am pretty settled with my conclusion(s).
Superthrive or Super-Jive
The question of the value of Superthrive as a miracle tonic for plants is often bandied about in horticultural circles. Several years ago, after reading claims that range from "I put it on and my plant, which had never bloomed, was in full bloom the next day" to "It was dead - I put Superthrive on it and the next day it was alive and beautiful, growing better than it ever had before", I decided to find out for myself. If you look for information on the net, you’ll find the manufacturer’s claims and anecdotal observations, totally lacking in anything that resembles anything like a control. Though my experiments were far from scientific, I tried to keep some loose controls in place so that I could make a fair judgment of its value, based my own observations. Here is what I did, what I found, and the conclusions I made about my use of Superthrive.
On four separate occasions, I took multiple cuttings from the same plant. The plant materials I used were: Ficus benjamina, (a tropical weeping fig) Luna apiculata (Peruvian myrtle), Chaenorrhinum minus (a dwarf snapdragon), and an unknown variety of Coleus. In each instance, I prepared cuttings from the same plant and inserted them in a very fast, sterile soil. Half of the cuttings were soaked in a Superthrive solution of approximately 1/2 tsp per gallon of water. The other half of the cuttings were watered in with water. In subsequent waterings, I would water the "Superthrive batch" of cuttings with a solution of 10 drops per gallon and the others with water. The same fertilizer regimen was followed on both groups of cuttings. In all four instances, the cuttings that I used Superthrive on rooted first. For this reason, it follows that they would naturally exhibit better development, though I could see no difference in vitality, once rooted. I can also say that a slightly higher percentage f cuttings rooted that were treated to the Superthrive treatment. I suspect that is directly related to the effects of the auxin in Superthrive hastening root initiation before potential vascular connections were destroyed by rot causing organisms.
In particular, something I looked for because of my affinity for compact branching in plants was branch (stem) extension. Though the cuttings treated with Superthrive rooted sooner, they exhibited the same amount of branch extension. In other words, internode length was approximately equal.
As a second part to each of my "experiments", I divided the group of cuttings that had not been treated with Superthrive into two groups. One of the groups remained on the water only program, while the other group was treated to a 10 drop per gallon solution of Superthrive. Again, the fertilizer regimen was the same for both groups. By summer’s end, I could detect no difference in bio-mass or vitality between the two groups of plants.
Since I replicated the above in four different trials, using four different plant materials, I’m confident in drawing some conclusions as they apply to me and my growing habits or abilities. First, based on my observations, I have concluded that Superthrive holds value for me as a rooting aid, or stimulant if you prefer. I regularly soak the soil, usually overnight, of my newly root-pruned and usually bare-rooted repots in a solution of 1/2 tsp Superthrive per gallon of water. Second, and also based on my observations, I don’t bother with its use at any time other than at repotting. No evidence was accumulated through the 4 trials to convince me that Superthrive was of any value as a "tonic" for plants with roots that were beyond the initiation or recovery stage.
The first ingredient listed as beneficial on the Superthrive label is vitamin B-1 (or thiamine). Growing plants are able to synthesize their own vitamin B-1 as do many of the fungi and bacteria having relationships with plant roots, so it's extremely doubtful that vitamin B-1 could be deficient in soils or that a growing plant could exhibit a vitamin B-1 deficiency.
Some will note that I used more of the product than suggested on the container. I wanted to see if any unwanted effects surfaced as well as trying to be sure there was ample opportunity for clear delineation between the groups. I suspect that if a more dilute solution was used, the difference between groups would have been less clear.
It might be worth noting that since the product contains the growth regulator (hormone) auxin, its overuse can cause defoliation, at least in dicots. The broad-leaf weed killer Weed-B-Gone and the infamous Agent Orange, a defoliant that saw widespread use in Viet Nam, are little more than synthetic auxin.
Al F.
 

DubB83

Well-Known Member
Some more independent input...

George Buehler said:
from www.louisvillebonsai.org

There has been a flurry of activity on the ABSForum regarding the use of SuperThrive. The original question that was posted was whether the stuff really worked and if other root stimulator products were just as good.
One response was that every time she transplanted a bonsai, she soaked the roots in a SuperThrive solution for 20 minutes prior to putting it in a pot. Of course she believes it is the best thing since sliced bread.
Another response was that plants do not need vitamins however manufacture their own vitamins. Therefore how could the SuperThrive help the tree? This respondent said that he switched to a material called Roots 2 and found that this material worked very well.
A number of respondents reported that they had used SuperThrive in the past but gave up using it. Their conclusion was that they didn't see any benefit.
It appears that SuperThrive consists of Thiamine (aka Vitamin B1) 0.09% and 1-napthyl acetic acid (0.048%). Thiamine was promoted as a root stimulant in a Botanical gazette in the 1930's. The research report could not be repeated by other researchers, and the original authors retracted their reports since they could not repeat the results either. The 1-naphtyl acetic acid is a synthetic auxin (a plant hormone). Whether it works or not is questionable.
Other respondents said they replaced the SuperThrive with other materials like MicroMax, Sequestrine or Roots 2, and they got better results.
The directions on SuperThrive say that it is to be used with fertilizers. Could perhaps the combination of SuperThrive and fertilizer cause it to work?
I know from personal contact that the Montreal bonsai arboretum did use SuperThrive but abandoned its use a number of years ago because they could not see any positive effects with its use. They replaced the SuperThrive with MicroMax after they did a short study on that.
Apparently this controversy has been going on for years. I know several of our members use it regularly, and at least one swears by it. I also know it is extremely difficult to substantiate whether a particular chemical or process works or doesn't work especially since we are limited by the number of specimens we have. Also all research (or at least all of the research I have read) has been done on plants/trees in a greenhouse or field environment, not the bonsai environment (rock soil, small pots, constant trimming, and repeated root pruning). Therefore, my questions to the membership:
Who uses it? Do you use it in combination with other chemicals? Have you tried eliminating it or substituting it for other materials? How many trees did you do your experiment on? Please let me know. I will report the results back in a future report.
 

StephyIsYourGod

Active Member
i went abit nuts with it one time and my girls went abit crazy hard to explain but it as you say read the directions, i mean if it was cool to add it all it would say, but its not, hope people trust my word, am one of these people that has to press the button when it says DO NOT PRESS lol...
what exactly happened when you used too much? ive been using superthrive lately, im not having too great of results.


what did your babies look like when ovewhelmed with it?
 

SimpleSimon

Well-Known Member
what exactly happened when you used too much? ive been using superthrive lately, im not having too great of results.


what did your babies look like when ovewhelmed with it?

The seedlings cotyledons burnt off.

The clones leaves grew erratically, and branching became very erratic.

It really looks like a cross between a marijuana plant and a fern. That being said, it looks VERY healthy. I'll get a pic here in a day or two
 

DubB83

Well-Known Member
You would have to be pretty ignorant to think that just because a association has non profit status, means that the people sitting on that board arn't making a TON of money.
I'm just going to avoid this thread because your grasping at straws here trying to do what ever you want. What I have said is 100% accurate, who cares about their paycheck, every board of every nonprofit organization has a massive payroll... It must be some big money conspiracy must be your conclusion. Did you even read what I posted?:wall:

Your the ignorant one here, enjoy the synthetic auxins.

Without OMRI listing, organic farms cannot use this product. This is not an organic product. If it was really organic they would get listed and boost their sales. If a company could offer a product to a niche market to boost sales, they would, that is just smart marketing. It is relatively cheap to have your product tested to gain the OMRI seal.
http://www.omri.org/OMRI_frequent.html#howmuch

The organization survives on donations and the yearly cost to use the seal and be approved, with out question, for USDA Certified Organic farming. Convince me that they make millions charging a few hundred dollars a product for just a couple hundred products. If anything I feel that for the service they are doing they are cutting a good deal to companies.

This is my last comment to you as I have provided more than enough information as to what it is and what it does and whether or not it is organic. Your questions have been answered and if you choose not to believe it then that is your problem.

I say good day.
:bigjoint:
 

zombie1334

Well-Known Member
I'm just going to avoid this thread because your grasping at straws here trying to do what ever you want. What I have said is 100% accurate, who cares about their paycheck, every board of every nonprofit organization has a massive payroll... It must be some big money conspiracy must be your conclusion. Did you even read what I posted?:wall:

Your the ignorant one here, enjoy the synthetic auxins.

Without OMRI listing, organic farms cannot use this product. This is not an organic product. If it was really organic they would get listed and boost their sales. If a company could offer a product to a niche market to boost sales, they would, that is just smart marketing. It is relatively cheap to have your product tested to gain the OMRI seal.
http://www.omri.org/OMRI_frequent.html#howmuch

The organization survives on donations and the yearly cost to use the seal and be approved, with out question, for USDA Certified Organic farming. Convince me that they make millions charging a few hundred dollars a product for just a couple hundred products. If anything I feel that for the service they are doing they are cutting a good deal to companies.

This is my last comment to you as I have provided more than enough information as to what it is and what it does and whether or not it is organic. Your questions have been answered and if you choose not to believe it then that is your problem.

I say good day.
:bigjoint:
Just because something isn't "Certified" Organic, doesn't mean that it isn't 100% organic. Have you ever been to a farmers market or even a local health food store? BMO nutrients aren't even "certified" organic, but I don't think you'll find many people that will call bullshit on them for not being 100% Organic. Getting "certified" is another way for Big Business to push local, independent farmers out of the way, plain and simple.

And also, just because something is "Certified Organic" also doesn't mean that it actually is 100% Organic. The USDA Certified Organic standard is that any product that is atleast 95% organic can carry the seal of USDA Organic. Hrmm, last time I checked 95% isn't the same as 100%.

There are a lot of reasons why "certifing" something organic isn't a good thing. And the reasons are very real, but I won't get into that diatribe on here.

Back to SuperThrive, I also personally don't think that it is all-organic either. I believe that it has some harsh metals in it's mix. I've seen it do some fucked up shit to plants.

Peace & Love.
 

Dr. Greenhorn

Well-Known Member
Just because something isn't "Certified" Organic, doesn't mean that it isn't 100% organic. Have you ever been to a farmers market or even a local health food store? BMO nutrients aren't even "certified" organic, but I don't think you'll find many people that will call bullshit on them for not being 100% Organic. Getting "certified" is another way for Big Business to push local, independent farmers out of the way, plain and simple.

And also, just because something is "Certified Organic" also doesn't mean that it actually is 100% Organic. The USDA Certified Organic standard is that any product that is atleast 95% organic can carry the seal of USDA Organic. Hrmm, last time I checked 95% isn't the same as 100%.

There are a lot of reasons why "certifing" something organic isn't a good thing. And the reasons are very real, but I won't get into that diatribe on here.


Peace & Love.
totally agree with you on that. can't be put any betterbongsmilie
 

DubB83

Well-Known Member
Just because something isn't "Certified" Organic, doesn't mean that it isn't 100% organic. Have you ever been to a farmers market or even a local health food store? BMO nutrients aren't even "certified" organic, but I don't think you'll find many people that will call bullshit on them for not being 100% Organic. Getting "certified" is another way for Big Business to push local, independent farmers out of the way, plain and simple.
True, there is no OMRI sticker on my mulch bin either, but that is a bit beyond the point. We are talking about a cheap way to gain confidence in your customer base or expand it. The company has been around for years and is obviously large enough to afford this small cost. If a small company wants to have their product evaluated it is a small investment, only a few hundred dollars, to get such a prestigious label on your bottle and they even market your product for you.

Here is the cost table break down (extremely cheap):
Table of Annual Supplier Fees
Gross Sales for Applying Firm.........OMRI Review Fee..............OMRI Renewal Fee
under $1 million...............................$390.................................$234
under $5 million...............................$650.................................$390
under $20 million............................$1300.................................$780
over $20 million..............................$1950...............................$1170
supplier does not wish to disclose......$1950...............................$1170

And also, just because something is "Certified Organic" also doesn't mean that it actually is 100% Organic. The USDA Certified Organic standard is that any product that is atleast 95% organic can carry the seal of USDA Organic. Hrmm, last time I checked 95% isn't the same as 100%.

There are a lot of reasons why "certifing" something organic isn't a good thing. And the reasons are very real, but I won't get into that diatribe on here.
There is a large difference in OMRI and USDA though. OMRI just makes it easier for a farmer to be USDA approved. I don't know what their standards have to do with OMRI's. Basically they are saying that nothing as complex as produce or any other end product can ever be 100% due to environmental factors.

From the OMRI website:
"About OMRI The Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) is a national nonprofit organization that determines which input products are allowed for use in organic production and processing. OMRI Listed—or approved—products may be used on operations that are certified organic under the USDA National Organic Program. "

"If I have a product successfully reviewed by OMRI, will it be certifier organic?

No. Products approved by OMRI are not eligible to use the USDA Certified Organic Seal or make claims that they are certified organic.

The reason lays in a basic understanding of two different types of certification offered in the organic industry. The first type is for the foods, fibers, and feeds. These products are eligible to be call "Certified Organic" and carry the USDA's seal for organic products. The second type is for the products used to grow or produce organic foods, feed, or fibers. They include substances such as fertilizers, pesticides, and other materials used on the farm or in the food processing facility. They are not eligible to carry the USDA seal or be called "certified organic." These types of products are either allowed or not allowed for use in organic agriculture or food processing.

Because the job of determining whether the inputs are allowed can be a tough one, OMRI has dedicated itself to the task exclusively. This means that OMRI reviews and approves material inputs to organic agriculture to determine whether they are allowed under US organic rules. If they are, then OMRI assists with the promotion of those inputs by licensing our seal of approval, OMRI Listed, and includes them in our directory viewed and trusted by thousands of organic farmers and gardeners throughout North America. "


"Why is OMRI not USDA accredited as an organic certifier?

OMRI is unique. Although we are a certifier, we are not an organic food/fiber/feed certifier. Therefore, we are not eligible for accreditation by the USDA. Instead, OMRI has recently achieved ISO accreditation. The audit and accreditation was coincidentally done by the USDA (actually the Audit, Review and Compliance Division). USDA auditors confirmed that OMRI solely uses the National Organic Program Rule. See this recent press release.

However, while ineligible for USDA organic certifier accreditation, the National Organic Program has recently acknowledged our vital role. A March 5th memo published on the NOP website explains this to the accredited certifiers and the public."


Back to SuperThrive, I also personally don't think that it is all-organic either. I believe that it has some harsh metals in it's mix. I've seen it do some fucked up shit to plants.

Peace & Love.
I agree there, the synthetic auxins are supposedly the same as Agent Orange used in Veitnam. :EEK
 

zombie1334

Well-Known Member
There are many problems that are very real (like I said) that arise when talking about Certified Organic, be it by the USDA or OMRI. Just the basic principle behind being "certified organic" is absurd. It is a consumer ploy to get yuppies to feel good about what they buy. There is a HUGE green (consumer) "revolution" or what you want to call it, going on in America. They will buy & sell you any lifestyle, and they don't care how radical that lifestyle is. If you can put a name on it (Organic) then you can buy & sell it at extremely high costs. All organic products are EXTREMELY expensive to buy. You (the consumer) are paying for the certification to make yourself feel good, instead of doing research yourself and buying products that could be even better than the certified products (BMO nutrients as a case in point). What about small independent organic famers that are trying to make a living in a capitalist society that can't afford the "couple hundred bucks" to get their product OMRI approved? Large Multinational grocery stores will usually only buy products from the lowest bidder. No small independent organic famer can compete with large corporate organic farms, because they are growing so little at a time that they can't afford to lower their prices. Small farmers go out of business this way, all because "the consumer" wants to see a stupid, meaningless lable on their products. I have seen this happen first hand, and it is continuing to happen with small family fun farms.

Another threat is that certification is reducing complex issues and regulations to a simple lable. This makes consumers more easily ignore the exact principles and practices behind organic farming, which makes the exact idea of "organic" a coined word open to manipulation. Organic farming is an issue that most American's should face, but instead they want to see a lable. No lable? No sale! More family run farms go out of business, even though they could be growing the most delicious food you've ever tasted. It's basically reducing the idea/practice of self-sustainabilty, community, & respect for our Mother (Earth) into consumerist, capitalist jargon that is doing more harm than good. Consumerism and wastefulness is not something to be applauded (but that's another topic in itself, as well haha).

Peace & Love.
 

Dr. Greenhorn

Well-Known Member
this FARMER says you are 100 percent correct on that point! consumers are easily led to believe what they read on a label, when its just that, a label.farmers around the world who really care about what they produce but don't give in to the big businesses get screwed by this.just my opinion anyway.
 

StephyIsYourGod

Active Member
The seedlings cotyledons burnt off.

The clones leaves grew erratically, and branching became very erratic.

It really looks like a cross between a marijuana plant and a fern. That being said, it looks VERY healthy. I'll get a pic here in a day or two


thank you very much sweetheart.
ill be looking for the pic.

im definatly putting less on my babies next time.

=]
 
Top