# LCN/MySoil Podcast Interview



## spraying_and_praying (Feb 24, 2021)

LCN released a podcast interview with MySoil people. Very interesting information about their soil test. I'm curious everyone's thoughts after you've reviewed the information. I have two MySoil kits I plan to use this spring. Link is below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcl0apTIBNo


----------



## spraying_and_praying (Feb 24, 2021)

Skip to 39:10 for the discussion of traditional labs vs MySoil, specifically the M3 test vs MySoil's test, using an actual customer's data from Waypoint and MySoil.


----------



## Lawn Noob (Jul 26, 2020)

What they're saying actually seems reasonable to me.

I used them this year and can say the results closely match my Soil Savvy results from last year.

I've yet to use a "real" lab.


----------



## spraying_and_praying (Feb 24, 2021)

It seems reasonable to me as well. I haven't run any soil tests yet, but I have a couple of MySoil kits that I plan to use this month (once the snow melts). I'm toying with running a couple of comparable soil tests using my county extension office ($12 per kit), just for comparison purposes. But I'm not sure that makes any sense given that we know they'll return different values, and it won't yield any valuable information to know that they differ.

I read through much of the robust debate about MySoil vs traditional lab tests here on this forum. It seems both the LCN and MySoil did this podcast to talk openly about these issues. Personally, I admire their willingness to confront these discussions head on (though I know I'm not nearly as versed on the specifics of these tests as many others on this forum).


----------



## Ridgerunner (May 16, 2017)

Maybe visuals will help as a multitude of numerous endless explanations just don't seem to have enlightened many:




Otherwise, have at it:


----------



## spraying_and_praying (Feb 24, 2021)

Tell us how you really feel Ridgerunner! :lol:

I've read the prior forum threads, and I get your point, particularly with respect to the lack of study data to confirm the accuracy of MySoil's/Soil Savvy's method. But I also don't feel like because our grandfather's grandfathers did it a certain way, we have to keep doing it that way as well. Sometimes, change is disruptive, but can be good in the long run.

I'm really starting to look at long-term cost and wondering if the premium is worth it for the information that I'm getting from MySoil. My county extension office charges $12 for soil testing vs MySoil at about $30 per test kit. I could break up my yard into three logical areas and test for little more than one soil test from MySoil. I may run both this year, just out of pure curiosity, and then make a decision as to my longer-term soil testing strategy.

In any case, I appreciate the perspectives on this forum.


----------



## g-man (Jun 15, 2017)

I did not watch the entire 1hr 20min, but someone pointed out the pH conversation. At minute 40:03, someone asked about the difference between a 6.7 and a 7.7 pH between MySoil and Waypoint. They never answered why the pH was so different.

First, a 1 point difference is huge since it is a log scale. It is 10 times different. Think of getting 10% of your paycheck instead of the full thing. A lot of the other nutrients availability are determined by the pH. One of the two test is just wrong (does not reflect the soil actual pH).

They try to say that their pH test method is different (saturated paste). But the test method does not explain this difference. Here is a quote from OSU: 


> Three common methods for soil pH determination are used by laboratories in the western United States-saturated paste, 1:1 and 1:2 ratio of soil to water. It has been shown that soil pH increases slightly for acidic soils as soil to water ratio increases. Soil pH by saturated paste will be slightly lower than 1:1, which will be slightly lower than 1:2 soil-water ratio. The differences between water measurements will be smaller though at about 0.1 - 0.2 pH units.


 - https://extension.oregonstate.edu/measuring-soil-ph



spraying_and_praying said:


> But I also don't feel like because our grandfather's grandfathers did it a certain way, we have to keep doing it that way as well. Sometimes, change is disruptive, but can be good in the long run.


Our grandfathers used round wheels and we continue to use them because they work. Change can be good and disruptive but the ball is in their court to prove the method and ranges. I feel it is more important to have a test method that yields repeatable and accurate results. Results that can be challenged and traced (like NIST). I will continue to spend my money on NAPT labs like many farmers, golf course supers, university research and athletic field managers do.


----------



## spraying_and_praying (Feb 24, 2021)

@g-man @Ridgerunner What are your thoughts on county extension office labs that are not NAPT labs? I checked the list in another thread, and the NAPT lab closest to me is in Ohio. My county extension is right down the road, and charges $12 per test kit. They dial in their equipment with my area's soil in mind given that they process thousands of soil samples per year from this state (at least they say so). New England soil is legendary for its acidity.


----------



## g-man (Jun 15, 2017)

UConn? They are good to use. They use a Modified Morgan Extractant and ridgerunner posted the ranges for it in his soil thread.

Here is an example of a UConn test results. https://thelawnforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=281769#p281769


----------



## spraying_and_praying (Feb 24, 2021)

@g-man Thanks for the info and link. I'll pick up some test kits from the extension office (which really is UConn) and simultaneously run them alongside the MySoil test kits and see how they compare. You've got my scientific curiosity piqued.  Thanks!


----------



## g-man (Jun 15, 2017)

:thumbup:


----------

