easymoney - 8/1/2025 08:15
ehoff - 8/1/2025 06:09
Snake oil is a product that a farmer sprays on his crop that doesnt “work” because the product doesnt address the most limiting factor or factors and doesnt raise yield therefore it is labelled snake oil.
Identifying your most limiting factors and fixing them as economically as possible is the way to higher yield and profit imo.
In general for 80% of nutrients you cant fix your deficiency through foliar spraying.
Thank you for the reply, I appreciate your perspective.
Is a product automatically snake oil if it doesn’t deliver results in one situation? Or is it more accurate to say it failed because it didn’t address the most limiting factor?
Take this example: if I apply foliar potassium and don’t get a crop response, does that make potassium a snake oil? Or was potassium simply not the limiting factor?
By that logic, if I spray fungicide and disease still comes in requiring a second or even third pass, doesn’t that make fungicide a snake oil too? We've been spraying fungicides for two decades, and diseases still persist. Clearly, that input isn’t “fixing” the root problem either.
You mentioned that 80% of nutrient deficiencies can’t be fixed with foliar applications. That’s likely true in many cases, but the number itself isn’t based on hard data. No credible agronomist promoting foliar nutrition is saying it will replace your whole fertility program. But a properly designed foliar program can be part of an overall nutrient management strategy, especially when applied at the right time to support plant function.
If we applied the same level of scrutiny to broadcast fertilizers and yield-goal fertility programs that we do to biologicals or foliars, we'd quickly see how much of that could also be called snake oil. Inputs are only effective when they address a real need.
So what actually makes a product “snake oil”? Here’s a list I think we could agree on:
No transparent label or guaranteed analysis
(Vague ingredients like “plant extracts” or “proprietary blend” with no specifics
)
No third-party or independent research
(Especially none across varied environments
)
No biological or chemical specificity
(In biologicals, no species, strain, or CFU counts
)
No explanation of mode of action
(No clarity on how or why it’s supposed to work
)
Overhyped claims with no context
(“Guaranteed yield increases” with no mention of crop, conditions, or limiting factors
)
One-size-fits-all solutions
(“Works everywhere, on everything, no soil test needed”
)
Avoids scrutiny or lab testing
(“We can’t share the formula because it’s proprietary”
)
Foliar feeding products macro/micro
