The following comment was made: "And we don't know of any immune response to RRV except maybe in certain species, do we?" -------------------------------------- I would definitely expect an immune response to mite attack. I also would expect an immune response (from very weak to complete immunity) to rose rosette virus which would vary in effectiveness depending on which variety, possibly temperature, possibly general health of the plant, possibly time in growing season, and other still unknown factors. We do know of three examples of unexpected behavior. One is that graft transfers of the virus in multiflora are not successful after a certain date. A second is for one species of rose the virus can go down one cane but does not go up other canes. A third is that 20% or in some cases more of infected roses appear to cure themselve (go into remission) but then the disease returns (have a relapse). "Q: Is the virus present in non-symptomatic tissue [on plants known to have been symptomatic]? It can be. We have seen about 20 percent of newly symptomatic roses, lose all trace of symptoms. However, the symptoms always return and usually cover most of the plant. The plant then usually dies a few months later." http://www.rosebreeders.org/forum/read.php?2,50305,50308#msg-50308 If the hydrogen peroxide treatment does work, it would be expected to word by enhancing the immune response. The 2012 review article for which I have included the quote below may be of interest. "Plants, however, lack specialized mobile immune cells. Instead, every plant cell is thought to be capable of launching an effective immune response. So how do plants achieve specific, self-tolerant immunity and establish immune memory? Recent developments point towards a multilayered plant innate immune system comprised of self-surveillance, systemic signalling and chromosomal changes that together establish effective immunity." Here is a link that might be useful: link for plant immune system 2012 review This post was edited by henry_kuska on Fri, May 10, 13 at 21:42

In the past few years, there have been many ideas coming forward that contradict our 'known' values. A famous one is that fat in the diet is bad for you. That theory has perhaps helped to cause our obesity epidemic as people replaced fat with sugar which turns us into weight gaining machines and causes diabetes. The other is that cleanliness is best. Yes there are bad things in the soil like tetanus. So get a tetanus shot. However, being antiseptic in everything is actually harmful to you. The rates of asthma and other allergic reactions are now thought to be because we are not exposed to ENOUGH 'germs' or microbes, many of which are helpful to us. Children that grow up in rural areas, on farms, or with contact with animals at a young age show lesser incidents of asthma and other disorders of the immune system. Just as there are microbes in the soil that help our plants, they can help us. This is why organically grown foods are better than those that use chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The latter do nothing for the nutritional value of the food, they just increase the size (and usually the amount of sugar) in the food. Which is not what we really need.

I live in unincorporated Orange County just outside Orlando. I pulled up the city code on municode.com. It is insane what they can and can't make you do, plant,not plant. The code for unincorporated orange county is not much better. This really isn't the governments place to restrict what people can grow in their yards. If people want control over that they can live in a deed restricted community. Sorry if this has been beaten thoroughly in another thread. I just had to vent a little! Whew. I feel better.

What a great read! Thanks so much for sharing. I have a friend who lives in a small town north of here. He doesn't follow Chris' strict protocol, but he does occasionally help himself to plants from abandoned property. I'm off to read the blog and do some shopping. ;)