Tad, thank you for an intelligent reply. With respect to Dr. Chalker-Scott, I believe she limited her review of published data to studies that were scientifically credible (eg. peer reviewed). Based on that, you cannot dismiss her findings as they are valid given the restraints of her review. Any holes in the methodology of these studies should have been exposed during the review process, and if found, would have been rejected for publication. Information that originates on manufacturers websites (with questionable or no references), are based on hearsay or studies that are not scientifically rigorous, is information one should be wary of. I agree with you on most all other points, however I am confused why you think my position is that soil biology is not important. In fact I do use and recommend compost teas in some situations. It however should be pointed out (as you did in a related thread), that compost teas are no substitute for a high quality compost. Given a choice, in most cases I would choose compost (preferably generated on-site) over a compost tea because it will contribute far more to good soil structure and biological diversity than compost tea alone. I have also used a combination of the two with soils that were essentially biologically dead. Every site is unique and needs to be evaluated with that in mind. I support continued study and responsible use of compost teas, however I feel there is still much research to be done before any reasonably valid conclusions can be drawn on its effectiveness as a foliar disease control alternative.