On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:14:00 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:45:30 -0000, "IMM" wrote:

he gave no evidence and the only dissenter.

There was nothing of any substance from anybody who posted in that
thread.

Andy, how would you know.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that this was a thread of the blind
leading the blind.

Put it another way.

I know from personal experience that ion exchange softeners work. I
can test the water and I know that less detergent is required than
without. I also know the chemical processes by which they work.

I know from personal experience that phosphate dosing works. I have
seen the results of that and again there is a well understood
mechanism.


I have seen from the experience of neighbours using exactly the same
water supply that I have that electronic and magnetic conditioners
don't work. Everybody that has bought one has taken it back for a
refund. There has never been a reliable scientific explanation of
why the mechanisms used would work in a domestic setting.
At best, there are a few people who claim that there is some positive
effect. Given that, and the efficacy of the other two methods,
the exercise seems pointless.





Personally. yet he has had excellent results in the field with customers.
That is why he got one.

When somebody admits they have a personal contact with the supplier of
something, I take that into account when they sing the praises of it,
that this might not be an unbiased view.





And the customers said it worked and kept it.

or they didn't notice that there was no effect but didn't care.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl