Article Discussion: New Salt Study

[NaH2O]

Anyone want to discuss this article? Inland Reef Aquaria Salt Study, Part I

Is there anything about the study you don't like? What did you like about the study?

I personally liked that they obtained the salts by buying them from wholesale suppliers or retail stores, or getting them directly from the manufacturer at trade shows. The manufacturers were not aware they were providing samples to be tested.

 

[Boomer]

Hey Nikki you beat me to the post

I was shocked at the Bromine level and do not believe them and neither does Randy

 

[Scooterman]

Oh no not another salt test, grrrr!
they forgot to test Morton go figure

 

[NaH2O]

Boomer, I did see that all the mixes had pretty elevated levels of Bromine, but I didn't know something could be flawed with the test. Do you have any thoughts as to why the Bromine results would come out like that? Is it something with the test they performed to determine those levels?

 

[pondfrog]

I find these discussions/studies difficult to follow for the following reasons:

1. These studies always seem to find that ALL salt mixes contain many elements that are present in significantly higher amounts than NSW.

2. We don't know what any of these elements do. Meaning what is toxic in a large dose may be safe at a low dose. And what exactly is a "high" amount?
For example compound A may be perfectly safe at levels 15x normal, yet compound B may only be safe at levels 5x normal. And to make matters worse each compound individually may be safe at those elevated levels, but present in combination may be toxic!

Please understand I am not negating some nice work or the motives of those undertaking it-- I seriously commend them and call for more work.
Unfortunately, all we can conclude at the end of these studies is that ALL salt mixes vary from NSW and from one another.

Now, I applaud any scientific venture as it adds to the database, I simply find it frustrating that we really don't know, as hobbyists, what is a "better" salt at the end of the day.
Much more research needs to be done, and to do that much more $ is needed.
.....................anyone up for a fundraiser?

Just some thoughts to fuel the fire.
steve

 

[mojoreef]

LOL to funny, I wonder how big Ron's shoe really is???? hehehe


Mike

 

[pondfrog]

OK, you lost me on that one.......:?:
Too new I guess........

 

[DonW]

OK, you lost me on that one.......:?:
Too new I guess........

No, just read the first few lines of the article.

Don

 

[Detri]

I found it hard to follow as well. It would help if they did a study as to what is toxic levels. And what metals are actually detrimental to sealife. But, there are few brands that fared farely well. It seems that IO amd kent are the more consistant of all the brands to NSW. Where they lack in what NSW has is that bad? Where they exceed what NSW has is that bad?

Dunno I am still learning this stuff though.

 

[wrightme43]

Dr. Ron is my idol. I want to be just like him.
On that note has anybody ever seen Dr. Nick on the Simpsons. you know "HI Everybody I'm Dr. Nick."

 

[pondfrog]

Detri, you are right on.
In the scheme of things the one thing that IO or Kent are off on may be the worst thing..........we just don't know.
Steve

 

[Detri]

Yea I wish I knew if they were bad or not. I think they need to follow that article up with a bit of an explainasion. Of the metals and toxins.

 

[NaH2O]

Yea I wish I knew if they were bad or not. I think they need to follow that article up with a bit of an explainasion. Of the metals and toxins.

I hope Part 2 of the article goes into some explaination (from the end of Part 1):

There are three separate areas to be addressed:

1. Does the manufacturer's data hold up to close scrutiny?

2. Are there heavy metal concentrations revealed in these tests that could account for Dr. Shimek's bio-assay results?

3. Do these results shed any light on the salt mix choices available to the hobbyist?

These items will be discussed in Part II of this article next month.

 

[Detri]

Yea I noticed that. The first part doesn't say they are going to explain there studies and the effects of each part in the mixes. Which to me would be the whole point of the study. Then agan I think they are assuming that anyone reading it will have that knowledge already. But hey, Its still informative.

 

[NaH2O]

The way the article is written, it appears to me to be a rebuttal against the study Dr. Ron did awhile back. For those that don't have a clue as to what I'm talking about....dare I put this up.....here's a link to it: The Toxicity of Some Freshly Mixed Artificial Seawater; A Bad Beginning for a Reef Aquarium by Dr. Ron.

 

[Maxx]

LOL to funny, I wonder how big Ron's shoe really is???? hehehe


Mike

I'm hoping its big enough to fill his mouth....size 22's anyone?


Pondfrog,
when Dr Ron Shimek posted his results from the first test he did....ALOT of people immediately switched salt brands to his "ideal" from the test. The vast majority of these people lost ALOT of corals from the switch. The SPS corals didnt do so well with the rapid change in salt mixes and died. Alot of people who kept excellent systems had some serious losses due to a salt switch. This (in addition to some other statements of "fact") have some people less than trusting of what he says.

Nick

 

[Esper]

i can't believe he just accepted the numbers from the sales brochure and the manufacturer...it sounds like they paid him to write that article...

 

[The Apprentice]

Salt studies

I used to use Oceanic = Hi calcium and good corline algae I now use IO = loosing Corline algae, But more stable calcium.

What salt are you using Nikki?

Anyone want to discuss this article? Inland Reef Aquaria Salt Study, Part I

Is there anything about the study you don't like? What did you like about the study?

I personally liked that they obtained the salts by buying them from wholesale suppliers or retail stores, or getting them directly from the manufacturer at trade shows. The manufacturers were not aware they were providing samples to be tested.

 

[NaH2O]

I switched to IO from Oceanic awhile back. The extremely high Ca and Mg with low alk was too much. I was happier with IO and supplementing for Calcium, than fighting with the alk of Oceanic. I also think that Oceanic contributed to a really bad algae problem, combined with other things. I'm not one to point fingers at one specific thing, but from threads and talking with others Oceanic seemed to be a player in algae problems. Can't argue with "when water changes began with Oceanic, cyano grew....after stopping Oceanic, cyano went away". This was with the same weekly water changes and maintenance. Only difference was salt mix. (oh, and that's not me talking by the way...its a friend of mine). I'm getting great coralline growth all over my back, bottom and have to scrape like mad to get it off the front. My hand was in the shape of a claw after the weekend. Sure wish I had a fancy fandangled big piece of magical plastic to make my coralline scrape with ease.

 

[snprhed]

A lot of people I know have had issues with the oceanic salt.