The UVB Varanid debate !

[murrindindi]

Originally Posted by V87

With regard to how many generations no idea but if it happens once it will happen again ..... No ?

Like I said when the results come out from you knw where it may go some way to proving uv and it's worth .... Did you read the link I put up ?

Same is said of a lot of husbandry issues .... How much of everything is scientifically proved ?

I put my self in the firing line because I believe uv is if worth to our captives ... They are designed for it over millions of years why would it not be of benefit ?

I'm not saying its a miracle but it if it has one advantage then why deny them it ?

I don`t think it`s enough to say "if it happens once it will happen again", we should have got past that stage by now, surely (guesswork, or "hope for the best")?
These days many of the results are in, there IS a "formula" for repeated breeding success over a number of generations with many species without the use of UVB bulbs as has already been explained. Those results ARE "scientific" in the sense they`ve been PROVEN to work time and time again over the last 15 to 20 years, whether they were published in scientific journals/other or not!

[V87]

Originally Posted by murrindindi

I don`t think it`s enough to say "if it happens once it will happen again", we should have got past that stage by now, surely (guesswork, or "hope for the best")?
These days many of the results are in, there IS a "formula" for repeated breeding success over a number of generations with many species without the use of UVB bulbs as has already been explained. Those results ARE "scientific" in the sense they`ve been PROVEN to work time and time again over the last 15 to 20 years, whether they were published in scientific journals/other or not!

With regard to guess work .... And happening again .... it was kinda rhetorical question we have all seen articles over the years of monitors breeding in these kinds of awful conditions ....ie no substrate poor heating poor diet ...

[V87]

Originally Posted by formica

whether it is scientific, depends which question is actually being asked, if you are asking, can they breed without UV, then fine, but, I dont think that is the question that anyone is actually asking, its certainly not the question I am asking, and nor is it the question that Dr Fry was asking, or the OP, or any of the scientists who wrote the 3 papers which have been posted to this thread.

There is another question which should be asked in relation to breeding, how successful is breeding without UV, in comparison to with UV? how is it effected?

If you want a scientific answer to something, it must be quantifiable in some way or another, the only question which is being answered in the affirmative, is can monitors breed without UV, which imo, is not actually a very important question in the grand scheme of things - the question which has now been answered with a quantifiable certainty, does UV has a positive health benefit to monitors, has been answered in the affirmative

This ^^^^^^^^

Originally Posted by jarich

No, it wasn't a misconception. Simply because the health benefits aren't visible doesn't mean they aren't real.

This ^^^^^^^^