[Lee]

You are always stimulating more questions for us to ponder-

Let me ask this question then in reply:

Would you agree - that within the extended period wherein you suggest there is going to occur a slow down in the maturity of the pond due to the addition of the Lymnozme (and, I don't know if you're correct as I don't know enough about the gestation period of all of the various bacteria within my pond)- would you also not agree that during this period that for the pond owner who has added Lymnozyme he/she is also experiencing a reduction to their being subject to aeramonis and ulcers?

What I am basically asking is whether the trade off is a good trade. And, not a confirmed only negative?

Thus, is it not possible that during the potentially slower maturity of the pond owners filter and biological system due to the addition of the Lymnozyne - which you view as a negative, is it also a positive also simultaneously occuring because during this same period the pond owners fish are far less subject to ulcers?

Therefore, the question which you have me now asking is whether you would agree that whilst the introduction of the Lymnozyme may be retarding the ponds maturation - in the interim it is also safeguarding and protecting the pond owners fish (whilst the pond and filters are maturing?)

Thus, if Lymnozyme serves as a potential defense to a fish getting ulcers and aermonis whilst the pond matures - even if it serves oto retard the ponds over all maturity wouldn't you still agree that Lymnozyme as Tom Lansing suggests it is still a valued product to the koi keepers arsenal?

Hum?

Lee
GC.