Is Thai Food Actually Healthy?

[rene123]

One thing about Thailand is there is an unending number of places to eat. It's easy to find one or two that suits your lifestyle. When I'm in Thailand I stay in Chiang Mai most of the time. I've found a couple of Thai cafes that offer good portions of great Thai meals at very reasonable prices. When I was in Nan on a bike ride I had to search for an hour before finding a place that served anything besides rice soup. I think that is all that the small cafes in Nan knew how to cook. Of course, if I had more time I'm sure I could have discovered a few places that offered a proper meal not soaked in salt and MSG. It's pretty hard to screw up a Thai omelette, Kow Padt or Padt Thai.

[Chittychangchang]

Isn't everything that's tasty and delicious bad for you.

I love broccoli!

Brocolli is the anti cancer power food of champions, the only minor side effect is flatulance. A small sacrifice imho worth taking.

[Chittychangchang]

Feedback: your paper covers all of the main points excellently. One little observation missing: in Chiang Mai, I never see a Thai person walking from point A to point B. If you see someone walking it is 99% likely to be a farang. So, the ubiquitous presence of the motor cycle (agent of death for the drunk, and spewer of filthy fumes, like song thaews) likely also contributes to obesity. Bicycles not encouraged.

Very little public park space within cities. In CM you have to go to the vast 700 Years Sports Complex, which is ok, but obviously a bit of an effort. How many Thai towns have a Centre where one can stroll and be free from pollution? There is quite a nice "centre" to Roi Et, where there is an artificial lake and lovely trees to encourage both walking and strolling. As far as I can make out, however, only the 'middle class" have the time to be able to walk there at the best time, round about 5 pm.

That may lead to one more point: in the West, fast food is consumed, mainly, by the poor and least educated. A more equitable system of salary distribution might help in the long run. (For ex, it is not so common to see the "better off" in society with fat bellies. Usually the obese are those who can only afford junk food (though it is more expensive than the kind of good nutritional food that can be bought in farmer's markets or at roadside stands....but there again, the poor do not have the time to go hunting for good food like that.)

In Thailand, the population should be encouraged to visit the Royal Projects to buy healthy food (or at least get a glimpse of it). Again, the problem is: Royal food is too expensive for the ordinary Thai.

Thanks for those comments which I will take onboard. I have been getting some helpful advice and I am amending the draft accordingly.

Some have suggested that I should say, well X% of the obesity problem is due to that factor and Y% is due to this, etc. But it's not that type of paper and I suspect that's not possible to do anyway ... too many variables. I also don't want to get into the arguable factors like MSG, chemical traces, GM food and so on .... will make the paper too long and involved, and have most ppls eyes glassing over. All I am trying to achieve here is raise the issue, identify the main variables, and make the point that because of their collective influence, the obesity problem will end up being as big or bigger than it is in the west.

Interestingly, with fast food ... In the west it is driven more by convenience and price of alternatives. In Thailand it is (at the moment) booming despite being more expensive and less convenient ... as I mention in the paper I think the demand is fuelled more by its western cachet than the other factors. cheers. bruce

Some interesting and good points made!

Let's hope this thread goes like a clockwork orange;-)

[Card]

One thing about Thailand is there is an unending number of places to eat. It's easy to find one or two that suits your lifestyle. When I'm in Thailand I stay in Chiang Mai most of the time. I've found a couple of Thai cafes that offer good portions of great Thai meals at very reasonable prices. When I was in Nan on a bike ride I had to search for an hour before finding a place that served anything besides rice soup. I think that is all that the small cafes in Nan knew how to cook. Of course, if I had more time I'm sure I could have discovered a few places that offered a proper meal not soaked in salt and MSG. It's pretty hard to screw up a Thai omelette, Kow Padt or Padt Thai.

The lack of roadside eateries in Nan leads to cleaner, less clogged streets with less food and used oil discarded around for dogs and rats. Also the air is cleaner due to less smoke from smoldering fat. Roadside food is a great polluter and certainly is not conducive to street walking!

Edited May 10, 2013 by Card

[ajarnwills]

I'm more concerned over the agro-chemicals/agro-pharmaceuticals with which Thai farm produce is drenched than I am over sugar/salt/fat in my food.

It is common practice for Thai farmers to raise two crops - chemical drenched crops for sale and chemical free crops for home consumption.

Sorry, I've run out of likes!!!

I agree with you 100%

and don't forget GMO's.

Given a choice, wild birds and animals ate the non GMO corn and largely ignored the GMO corn right next to it.

The wild ones know where there is proper nutrition and where not!

Drivel - except in your imagination. There is no known case in the scientific literature that shows this. Just another piece of organic propaganda.

Oh dear, the brainwashing is complete! and what makes you think that only Science is truthful?

Scientists are bribed to tell lies every day world wide.

I suppose you will prove that fluoride is an essential nutrient and it should be added in uncontrolled amounts to your drinking water. I suppose that mercury added as a preservative to your shots to give them a longer shelf life is also good for you?

Just find out who paid for the "research" that you are relying on.

Find out if they published all the facts and didn't suppress some because they didn't tell the story that they wanted. That they then change the test criteria until they can do a test that proves what they want to see.

Anecdotal evidence is all around you - you only need to have an open mind to see it.

But, up to you as they say here.

You seem a little confused.....

Science can be tested....only people including can lie.

Edited May 10, 2013 by ajarnwills

[GuestHouse]

I'm more concerned over the agro-chemicals/agro-pharmaceuticals with which Thai farm produce is drenched than I am over sugar/salt/fat in my food.

It is common practice for Thai farmers to raise two crops - chemical drenched crops for sale and chemical free crops for home consumption.

Sorry, I've run out of likes!!!

I agree with you 100%

and don't forget GMO's.

Given a choice, wild birds and animals ate the non GMO corn and largely ignored the GMO corn right next to it.

The wild ones know where there is proper nutrition and where not!

Drivel - except in your imagination. There is no known case in the scientific literature that shows this. Just another piece of organic propaganda.

Meanwhile there is plenty of scientific and medical evidence to demonstrate that previous 'wonder curses' for crop pests and diseases have resulted in long term and often lethal impacts on the health of humans, animal life and the natural environment.

And there equally plenty of evidence that the causes of food shortages are not related to a need for GMO but relate to land distribution, the politics of food production and more recently the putting land into the production of bio fuels.

GMO is not about providing healthier food for people, its all about obtaining patents over the food we eat and in doing so monopolizing the seed production and sales.

The evidence is that past 'scientific cures' to food production have done little more than demonstrate the arrogance and corruption of the age-science community while the lawyers and lobbyists are now on board fighting tooth and nail to prevent communities having the right to say no to GMO or even having the right to know that the food they eat contains GMO.

If GMO is harmless and good for us - why then the fight against having GMO food labeled so we know what we are eating?

[Andre0720]

The bottom line is:

If you do not grow it yourself, you have no idea what you are eating...

[robblok]

Sorry, I've run out of likes!!!

I agree with you 100%

and don't forget GMO's.

Given a choice, wild birds and animals ate the non GMO corn and largely ignored the GMO corn right next to it.

The wild ones know where there is proper nutrition and where not!

Drivel - except in your imagination. There is no known case in the scientific literature that shows this. Just another piece of organic propaganda.

Oh dear, the brainwashing is complete! and what makes you think that only Science is truthful?

Scientists are bribed to tell lies every day world wide.

I suppose you will prove that fluoride is an essential nutrient and it should be added in uncontrolled amounts to your drinking water. I suppose that mercury added as a preservative to your shots to give them a longer shelf life is also good for you?

Just find out who paid for the "research" that you are relying on.

Find out if they published all the facts and didn't suppress some because they didn't tell the story that they wanted. That they then change the test criteria until they can do a test that proves what they want to see.

Anecdotal evidence is all around you - you only need to have an open mind to see it.

But, up to you as they say here.

You seem a little confused.....

Science can be tested....only people including can lie.

That is the whole point.. the people who do the tests stand to benefit from good results. There is no independent group testing or verifying.. just like in the pharmacuitical industry. They discard everything that does not benefit them. I truly believe in science.. but as long as there is no law that these tests have to be reproduced or verified by an independent body I trust little of it.

[Keesters]

What about palm oil that is almost always used in street foods? Although opinion is divided, my own feeling is that it is causing my ldl levels to go up since moving here. I don't smoke now, do exercise daily and before coming here, had no cholesterol issues. my doctor reckons palm oil is not as healthy as other vegetable oils.

The 60 year old lady who ran, until recently, a roadside cafe near me would agree with you. She changed to rice bran oil long time ago. She also offered red/brown rice as an alternative to white. Unfortunately she has now moved far away. I'm back now to palm oil and white rice unless I cook at home.

[Card]

I'm more concerned over the agro-chemicals/agro-pharmaceuticals with which Thai farm produce is drenched than I am over sugar/salt/fat in my food.

It is common practice for Thai farmers to raise two crops - chemical drenched crops for sale and chemical free crops for home consumption.

Sorry, I've run out of likes!!!

I agree with you 100%

and don't forget GMO's.

Given a choice, wild birds and animals ate the non GMO corn and largely ignored the GMO corn right next to it.

The wild ones know where there is proper nutrition and where not!

Drivel - except in your imagination. There is no known case in the scientific literature that shows this. Just another piece of organic propaganda.

Meanwhile there is plenty of scientific and medical evidence to demonstrate that previous 'wonder curses' for crop pests and diseases have resulted in long term and often lethal impacts on the health of humans, animal life and the natural environment.

And there equally plenty of evidence that the causes of food shortages are not related to a need for GMO but relate to land distribution, the politics of food production and more recently the putting land into the production of bio fuels.

GMO is not about providing healthier food for people, its all about obtaining patents over the food we eat and in doing so monopolizing the seed production and sales.

The evidence is that past 'scientific cures' to food production have done little more than demonstrate the arrogance and corruption of the age-science community while the lawyers and lobbyists are now on board fighting tooth and nail to prevent communities having the right to say no to GMO or even having the right to know that the food they eat contains GMO.

If GMO is harmless and good for us - why then the fight against having GMO food labeled so we know what we are eating?

Some of what you say is true but there are important omissions. the bit about other causes of food shortages is true, but who is doing anything about them? In the absence of political will, the scientists have stepped in to provide some kind of solution. I don't see the organic lobbyists harassing governments to do something about the causes u write about. They just attack scientists.

Yes, I agree many of the GMOs are about producing CHEAPER food - cheaper because they store better, retain their freshness longer, have greater productivity, more resistant to pests and diseases - the type of food we all want and the Monsantos of this world have taken that on board. But many new GMOs are being produced by universities and international organisations that are more nutritious, medically important for the third world and can resist the stresses resulting from global warming. And do you know what? the organic lobbyists are against them because they don't support their blind philosophy. BTW, organic produce is not about growing food in the absence of pesticides. All organic produce uses some chemicals, many of which are more dangerous than the Monsanto variety. And they are allowed. The only difference is that these ones are not synthetic. Organic agriculture is not about safety, it's about what is natural or synthetic. Do a search on 'Pesticides in Organic agriculture' and then open your mind..

I might add that scientists are also responsible for the pharmaceutical industry. Oh, I hear you cry. But when you get sick, you will run straight to the doctor for your jabs, drugs, operations etc, etc, etc. All produced by commercial scientists. The same as if you were starving - a mouthful of GMOs is the only thing left - you and all the other organic lobbyists will be gobbling away, and not in the least complaining.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Card

[GuestHouse]

organic produce uses some chemicals, many of which are more dangerous than the Monsanto variety

____________________________________

I've been growing organic food since I was a child.

When I'm not at my day job my wife and I run an organic cooperative.

I have never used any chemicals on the land or produce I have grown.

And I am reminded of the agro chemical lobbyists here in Thailand petitioning the Thai government to classify traditional natural pesticides as 'Poisonous' an effort that had the Thai government banning the use of 'Garlic' as being a dangerous pesticide.

[GuestHouse]

Card, you are conveniently missing two points.

1. The past evidence that technology is not a cure for the social, economic and political issues around food production - rather a tool to further entrench control within the hands of the agro-chemical industry.

2. Past scientific cures for the wold food problems have killed/poisoned people, wildlife snd the environment.

Edited May 11, 2013 by GuestHouse

[GuestHouse]

If GMO is harmless and good for us - why then the fight against having GMO food labeled so we know what we are eating?

_______________________________

Any takers?

[Card]

Card, you are conveniently missing two points.

1. The past evidence that technology is not a cure for the social, economic and political issues around food production - rather a tool to further entrench control within the hands of the agro-chemical industry.

2. Past scientific cures for the wold food problems have killed/poisoned people, wildlife snd the environment.

Because they are only vague assertions with no details and I don't even understand what u mean by scientific cures.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Card

[robblok]

If GMO is harmless and good for us - why then the fight against having GMO food labeled so we know what we are eating?

_______________________________

Any takers?

Quite easy because then people could make a choice and many would not choose GMO foods.. and that would make it less profitable for them.

[Card]

If GMO is harmless and good for us - why then the fight against having GMO food labeled so we know what we are eating?

_______________________________

Any takers?

Quite easy because then people could make a choice and many would not choose GMO foods.. and that would make it less profitable for them.

The reason is that there is no justification for labeling on food unless it affects the basic ingredients and those ingredients are unsafe or a cause for concern. If an ingredient is say fructose and it was produced by GMO or not and there is no difference between the two, then why label it GMO? Only the organic lobby want that because they focus on the process not the product even if the product is identical - it's a philosophy thing, not a scientific thing.

[Card]

organic produce uses some chemicals, many of which are more dangerous than the Monsanto variety

____________________________________

I've been growing organic food since I was a child.

When I'm not at my day job my wife and I run an organic cooperative.

I have never used any chemicals on the land or produce I have grown.

And I am reminded of the agro chemical lobbyists here in Thailand petitioning the Thai government to classify traditional natural pesticides as 'Poisonous' an effort that had the Thai government banning the use of 'Garlic' as being a dangerous pesticide.

Good of you then - but what about other producers?

[robblok]

If GMO is harmless and good for us - why then the fight against having GMO food labeled so we know what we are eating?

_______________________________

Any takers?

Quite easy because then people could make a choice and many would not choose GMO foods.. and that would make it less profitable for them.

The reason is that there is no justification for labeling on food unless it affects the basic ingredients and those ingredients are unsafe or a cause for concern. If an ingredient is say fructose and it was produced by GMO or not and there is no difference between the two, then why label it GMO? Only the organic lobby want that because they focus on the process not the product even if the product is identical - it's a philosophy thing, not a scientific thing.

Its limiting the freedom of choice of consumers.. you can say all you want not everyone has to buy it they can have other views. You sound like one of those religious types.. my religion is the best you cant choose or ill burn you at the stake.

If its labeled people can choose.

[GuestHouse]

Card, you are conveniently missing two points.

1. The past evidence that technology is not a cure for the social, economic and political issues around food production - rather a tool to further entrench control within the hands of the agro-chemical industry.

2. Past scientific cures for the wold food problems have killed/poisoned people, wildlife snd the environment.

Because they are only vague assertions with no details and I don't even understand what u mean by scientific cures.

You mean you want me to post the full body of social, political, economic and scientific reasesrch on the subject of the causes of food shortages followed by the full body of research into past environmental and life/health damage caused by agro-chemicals simply because you lack any background in the subject you are waffling on about?

[GuestHouse]

organic produce uses some chemicals, many of which are more dangerous than the Monsanto variety

____________________________________

I've been growing organic food since I was a child.

When I'm not at my day job my wife and I run an organic cooperative.

I have never used any chemicals on the land or produce I have grown.

And I am reminded of the agro chemical lobbyists here in Thailand petitioning the Thai government to classify traditional natural pesticides as 'Poisonous' an effort that had the Thai government banning the use of 'Garlic' as being a dangerous pesticide.

Good of you then - but what about other producers?

You mean I've given you a first hand account of how my organic does not use chemicals and you want me to confirm other producers do in order to prove your blindly unfounded assertion true?

Doh!

Edited May 11, 2013 by GuestHouse

[EBlair48]

It's a capitalism thing, profit above all is the corporations' mantra, by law in fact. ( IMO, change that and all ills will resolve.)

Don't forget the basic ingredient the Thai cook dumps in everything, MSG.

If GMO is harmless and good for us - why then the fight against having GMO food labeled so we know what we are eating?
_______________________________

Any takers?

Quite easy because then people could make a choice and many would not choose GMO foods.. and that would make it less profitable for them.

The reason is that there is no justification for labeling on food unless it affects the basic ingredients and those ingredients are unsafe or a cause for concern. If an ingredient is say fructose and it was produced by GMO or not and there is no difference between the two, then why label it GMO? Only the organic lobby want that because they focus on the process not the product even if the product is identical - it's a philosophy thing, not a scientific thing.

Edited May 11, 2013 by EBlair48

[DiamondKing]

The OP wrote that white rice has no nutritional value. How can that be true? It provide calories needed by your body. Healthy eating is not about the food - but the portions that you take. But it seems the OP would rather have a Big Mac with a Big Gulp.

Before Starbucks, Big Macs, Pizzas and other western food were introduced in Thailand, obesity rates among Thais were low. Twenty years ago, I estimated there were two to three kids out of a hundred that was overweight. Today, that figure is around 30 out of a hundred (just my estimate by the way).

The kind of food available to kids have changed. Before it was Papaya pokpok and Larb. Now its deep fried processed S!@#$T dipped in batter, crepe, fries and other western-influenced snacks. Kids just love it! They they leave school and hit the video games shop. Hmmmmm....

Here's a little graphic showing how Thai people are getting fatter than most of their neighbors.

Overweight S E Asians.jpg

Looks like we need to move to vietnam

[chiangmaibruce]

Here's a little graphic showing how Thai people are getting fatter than most of their neighbors.

Overweight S E Asians.jpg

Looks like we need to move to vietnam

Mr Brad, Thanks for posting that graphic, alerting folks to the WHO study

[doggie888888]

What about palm oil that is almost always used in street foods? Although opinion is divided, my own feeling is that it is causing my ldl levels to go up since moving here. I don't smoke now, do exercise daily and before coming here, had no cholesterol issues. my doctor reckons palm oil is not as healthy as other vegetable oils.

The 60 year old lady who ran, until recently, a roadside cafe near me would agree with you. She changed to rice bran oil long time ago. She also offered red/brown rice as an alternative to white. Unfortunately she has now moved far away. I'm back now to palm oil and white rice unless I cook at home.

I am avoiding palm oil like the plague, so more home cooking. Whenever I ask what cooking oil outside places use, it's always palm oil. Gee, considering there is some doubt about the healthiness of it, I am surprised there is not much visible debate about it.

[julemanden]

Considering that Asians have been surviving for centuries with their diet I find it hard to believe that it can be too bad for you. Why do farang males seem to like the slim, trim beauties that Thailand seems to produce. But, when those same Thai women marry farangs and start eating western food they quickly fatten up like us western women on our supposedly "better" diet. .

I just wonder.... How many did survive it and for how many years Too much cancer in this country

[rosst]

Oh boy, where to start!! I frequent Isaan and a rural village at that. The food prepared in my home is very healthy, low fat mainly vegetarian and low animal fat meat with rice three times a day. I also exercise every day as does my Thai lady under protest. Most Thai do not walk but she is learning.

I believe it is all about balance and being truthful to yourself. I admit my beer is fattening but I watch my diet and exercise to ensure I do not damage my health too much by drinking. I gave up smoking six years ago and I am now healthier than I have been for twenty years.

The obesity epidemic visiting Thailand is appalling American crap masquerading as food, disgusting. There is so much excellent Thai food, you wonder why people would sully their bodies with this sh..t.

[laislica]

organic produce uses some chemicals, many of which are more dangerous than the Monsanto variety

____________________________________

I've been growing organic food since I was a child.

When I'm not at my day job my wife and I run an organic cooperative.

I have never used any chemicals on the land or produce I have grown.

And I am reminded of the agro chemical lobbyists here in Thailand petitioning the Thai government to classify traditional natural pesticides as 'Poisonous' an effort that had the Thai government banning the use of 'Garlic' as being a dangerous pesticide.

Good of you then - but what about other producers?

Of course chemicals are used. I will make my point here with a single chemical because I can't be bothered to explain that everything is a chemical, You would die in a short time if you didn't drink a chemical,

H₂O + goodness knows how many trace elements, salts as well as organic material:

So, be honest now GH,

If you've ever had an infestation of sap sucking beasties on your lovely plants then GH, I suggest you would be the first to rush over and spray something like :-

Chemical Name: Sodium n-dodecyl benzene sulphonate, Chemical Formula: CH₃ (CH₂)11 C₆H₄ SO₃- Na+,

suitably diluted with water (H₂0) - of course, all over, drenching the lot.

It would be quick and effective and the beasties would be dead and gone in a day.

This chemical is generally known as household detergent, it washes off the waxy coat from the beasties and they drown.

So Card, you are technically right, chemicals are allowed and are used. However, they are generally topical, not systemic and certainly not pesticides produced by the plants after certain GM's.

I have used tobacco, boiled up with oleander leaves and garlic and I'd hate to see a chemical formula for that because it would look like a massive formula but again it washes off and breaks down in the sun.

I doubt if you would ever open your mind enough to let some enlightenment in and I'm done with you on this topic because the info you have available does not enrich my knowledge.

I think I may be starting to suffer from Tourette's syndrome because I keep getting a powerful urge to Shout TROLL!!!

I also used chemical fertilizers, made my own:

Take some old tights stuff a good portion of chicken shit in them and soak in a water butt for weeks.

Since this is an ideal mozzy breeding ground, keep the lid on.

Dispense some of the liquid into a watering can or spray pump, dilute with water and spray away - it's an excellent foliar feed.

Again, quite right (technically), chems are used with organics!

I've got my coat and am leaving.

Wanders off muttering, there's non so blind as them as don't want to see.......

and, shall I watch The Matrix trilogy again? TROLL

Oops, there it goes again......

[GuestHouse]

So, be honest now GH,

If you've ever had an infestation of sap sucking beasties on your lovely plants then GH, I suggest you would be the first to rush over and spray something like :-

Is that ME being honest, or YOU revealing your preconceived ideas?

[Sayonarax]

lol

The OP wrote that white rice has no nutritional value. How can that be true? It provide calories needed by your body. Healthy eating is not about the food - but the portions that you take. But it seems the OP would rather have a Big Mac with a Big Gulp.

Before Starbucks, Big Macs, Pizzas and other western food were introduced in Thailand, obesity rates among Thais were low. Twenty years ago, I estimated there were two to three kids out of a hundred that was overweight. Today, that figure is around 30 out of a hundred (just my estimate by the way).

The kind of food available to kids have changed. Before it was Papaya pokpok and Larb. Now its deep fried processed S!@#$T dipped in batter, crepe, fries and other western-influenced snacks. Kids just love it! They they leave school and hit the video games shop. Hmmmmm....

Oh not the evil video games! That's what made them fat..

Edited May 11, 2013 by Sayonarax

[Sayonarax]

organic produce uses some chemicals, many of which are more dangerous than the Monsanto variety

____________________________________

I've been growing organic food since I was a child.

When I'm not at my day job my wife and I run an organic cooperative.

I have never used any chemicals on the land or produce I have grown.

And I am reminded of the agro chemical lobbyists here in Thailand petitioning the Thai government to classify traditional natural pesticides as 'Poisonous' an effort that had the Thai government banning the use of 'Garlic' as being a dangerous pesticide.

Good of you then - but what about other producers?

Of course chemicals are used. I will make my point here with a single chemical because I can't be bothered to explain that everything is a chemical, You would die in a short time if you didn't drink a chemical,

H₂O + goodness knows how many trace elements, salts as well as organic material:

So, be honest now GH,

If you've ever had an infestation of sap sucking beasties on your lovely plants then GH, I suggest you would be the first to rush over and spray something like :-

Chemical Name: Sodium n-dodecyl benzene sulphonate, Chemical Formula: CH₃ (CH₂)11 C₆H₄ SO₃- Na+,

suitably diluted with water (H₂0) - of course, all over, drenching the lot.

It would be quick and effective and the beasties would be dead and gone in a day.

This chemical is generally known as household detergent, it washes off the waxy coat from the beasties and they drown.

So Card, you are technically right, chemicals are allowed and are used. However, they are generally topical, not systemic and certainly not pesticides produced by the plants after certain GM's.

I have used tobacco, boiled up with oleander leaves and garlic and I'd hate to see a chemical formula for that because it would look like a massive formula but again it washes off and breaks down in the sun.

I doubt if you would ever open your mind enough to let some enlightenment in and I'm done with you on this topic because the info you have available does not enrich my knowledge.

I think I may be starting to suffer from Tourette's syndrome because I keep getting a powerful urge to Shout TROLL!!!

I also used chemical fertilizers, made my own:

Take some old tights stuff a good portion of chicken shit in them and soak in a water butt for weeks.

Since this is an ideal mozzy breeding ground, keep the lid on.

Dispense some of the liquid into a watering can or spray pump, dilute with water and spray away - it's an excellent foliar feed.

Again, quite right (technically), chems are used with organics!

I've got my coat and am leaving.

Wanders off muttering, there's non so blind as them as don't want to see.......

and, shall I watch The Matrix trilogy again? TROLL

Oops, there it goes again......

Why give a chemistry and science lesson to people who have no clue what there on about? Its pointless.