It sounds like most of the "science" doesn't like this approach, but I have already made the investment and so far so good. I am a little jaded regarding the studies as they were probably sponsored by a company that produces a pre-mixed mineral. Much like the bad press on eggs years ago. Those studies were sponsored by a large cereal company (Kellogg I believe) and now 30+ years later these have been debunked. The same for low fat diets. They have been horrible for our country and it is hard for patients and staff to understand what is and isn't healthy. This mineral idea may not work and I am not trying to change what anyone does, but after raising cattle for 20+ years now, I have realized that I should of just listened to the old farmers that bought and paid for their farms with cattle. I thought I was smarter and read more and followed the latest science. Now I am doing more of what they recommended and continuing with what works here and with what works with my work schedule. Each of us has a different environment to work with and different time constraints. I agree 100% with the KISS principle and I am trying this due to previous failures with the pre-mixed minerals I have tried. If what you are doing works, don't change it. I won't know for a couple of years if this is any better or worse than what I have previously tried. I do know that I have worried about grass tetany at this time of the year in the past and I have only seen it once. With the group on the cafeteria style minerals, I am not worried due to their excellent consumption of magnesium over the past 3 months. I am keeping the two groups calving off of fresh pasture and just on hay for another week or so depending on grass growth. If I have problems when I put them on grass, I will post an update. I do greatly appreciate the discussion and, unfortunately, I am a little less optimistic than I was, but only time will tell if this works any better or not and what the actual costs will be.