Just say no to the Mr Clean Magic Eraser

[doctorwhoreefer]

I'm pretty alarmed by the number of people suggesting others use this in their tank against algae.

Does it work? Sure. I have no doubt at all.

But the fact remains from the physics of rubbing something, small particulates are created, and you're introducing a undigestable, non-biodegradable polymer/plastic into your tank.

As seen with studies in the ocean concerning micron sized particles of plastic, they will get stuck in gills, fish scales(see GAC dust and HLLE), and if the corals or fish ingest these, they cannot break them down. Will the animals just pass the particles? Perhaps, unless they get stuck because of buildup.
But the truth remains, the animal has to use energy to pass this through their digestive system. That's energy used towards a supposed food source, that does not give the animal energy, thus increasing their workload with less return.


Please don't use this in your tank and please correct those who suggest it. It's not rocket science to understand the particles are ending up in your tank and the animals. I've seen many people say they see no negative effects.(are these people even considering their random deaths/necrosis events could be caused by it? probably not) But I have yet to see one person dissect a coral that's been subjected to this and analyze their gut contents.

How's the saying go? If you can't test for it, don't put it in your tank.
There's a lot of misinformation in this hobby, but I believe that suggesting the magic eraser's takes the cake.

[d2mini]

I understand your theory and appreciate your intentions, but I'd like to see actual proof one way or the other.
Just think of the dust alone that settles in everyone's water, especially open top tanks.
And when I've used these pads, the pad comes out covered in whatever color algae it removed. So I doubt much if any of the pad was left in the tank. Users are not scrubbing stone tile with it. I'd say most are wiping away light algae films, then the pad is removed and rinsed outside the tank.
The chances of any detrimental effect from these pads is slim to none.

[ReefKeep66]

It's easier just to get a good mag cleaner and not worry about it either way. The flipper for me is arguably the best mag cleaner.out there.

[gone fishin]

I have always used a mag cleaner. I can see both sides of the argument. I think though I would have to agree with Dennis.

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by d2mini

I understand your theory and appreciate your intentions, but I'd like to see actual proof one way or the other.
Just think of the dust alone that settles in everyone's water, especially open top tanks.
And when I've used these pads, the pad comes out covered in whatever color algae it removed. So I doubt much if any of the pad was left in the tank. Users are not scrubbing stone tile with it. I'd say most are wiping away light algae films, then the pad is removed and rinsed outside the tank.
The chances of any detrimental effect from these pads is slim to none.

:P
It's not theory though, there's actually quite a bit of research out there about the ocean and micron sized particles of plastic causing problems. Here's a few good reads. Though I did think about getting some particles of the magic eraser and putting them under the microscope next to some 80 micron sized plankton and asking people about how corals feed.
http://www2.drury.edu/hawaii_field_s...ch%20Paper.pdf

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3032927/w...d-to-visualize

http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/re...e-in-the-ocean

http://www.scientificamerican.com/po...pped-in-gills/

Otherwise concerning dust that settles in our tanks, it probably doesn't contain a lot of plastic. And though you describe a very light use of the magic eraser that sounds better, it's still exposing the tank to something that's undigestable and doesn't degrade. Let alone the same can't be said about 'wiping away the dust' if it's coralline... I would bet my life savings on it that some people have rubbed those things ragged in their tank.

I even had someone say one time "well I see studies about plastic particulates in the ocean, where's the study about the affect in the aquarium?"

In response to that I said, "I see studies about motor oil in the ocean, but none about it in my tank!"

Overall though, if we're going to treat this scientifically, we know how friction works, we know how abrasion works, and we know what the substance it is.(remember though, even bending a substance can cause it to come apart into finer particulates; you ARE adjusting the molecules) We also know corals eat micron sized particles, and micron sized particles interact with gills and the creatures digestive system.

In the opposite direction, when was the last time you dissected a coral in your tank to examine the gut content?

I appreciate the cross examination of the subject, but I feel it excuses the use of it. And in the end, how many people do you think that have used this in their tank, thought twice about it after a coral or fish died?

[KafudaFish]

The product has been evaluated and does not require warning labeling under California Proposition 65 so how bad can it be?

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by KafudaFish

The product has been evaluated and does not require warning labeling under California Proposition 65 so how bad can it be?

If it's true to the examinations thus far, it's non-toxic. I don't really doubt that.
But the point is it's adding fine plastic particulates to your tank.
I'll have to give a +1 to keeping it more like the ocean.(totally joking, I'm referring to pollution )

I find it curious though people look at carbon dust linking to HLLE as a serious thing, but not plastic dust?

It does say on the label though "do not ingest", and that's exactly what your fish and corals are doing.

[Reef Frog]

The dangerous particles you refer too are broken down by natural processes over time in the ocean. The ME is just in the tank for just a minute or two at a time. It's possible that some unknown chemical can leach something we don't want - that seems plausible and more of a concern to me at least.

I tried it a few times and it works great. Next time I cut a thin slice I'll do so over a dark surface & look under magnification and see if I can spot dust.

[KafudaFish]

How do you know that it is being ingested?

[killinit123]

the real question here is how many people are doing this? how often? and what changes if any can you see in water chemistry? or what affects can be observed in health of fish and coral? in order to find a definite answer to this you need to test it and test it for an extended period of time. i am going to assume there are some sort of chemicals in a magic eraser i would be more concerned about that leaching into the water than the particulates from it itself. IMO i wouldnt risk it a razer blade does just fine for me removing film algae and coraline and its even easier with a mag cleaner when done often enough. I would like to see the results of someone doing this over a long period of time though im kind of interested.

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by KafudaFish

How do you know that it is being ingested?

How do you know plankton is being ingested?

[snorvich]

I use mighty magnets for most algae issues. For tough algae issues I use scratch removal sandpaper. I have used magic eraser before with no obvious effects.

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by killinit123

the real question here is how many people are doing this? how often? and what changes if any can you see in water chemistry? or what affects can be observed in health of fish and coral? in order to find a definite answer to this you need to test it and test it for an extended period of time. i am going to assume there are some sort of chemicals in a magic eraser i would be more concerned about that leaching into the water than the particulates from it itself. IMO i wouldnt risk it a razer blade does just fine for me removing film algae and coraline and its even easier with a mag cleaner when done often enough. I would like to see the results of someone doing this over a long period of time though im kind of interested.

+1 to a razor or intended acrylic magfloat

I've seen people suggest the original as supposedly it doesn't leach or have any chemical additives. The melamine is rather chemically inert. It can be affected and degraded by several acids, but this probably wouldn't be experienced in our tanks. But as it's comparable to glass(it was originally a type of insulation and flame retardant compound) in molecular structure iirc, I would bet it "shatters".

Even if there's only trace amounts, how are people not going to object to that, but object to only trace amounts of iodine being added, or potassium, or whatever additives.

On a serious note though, to fully clear the possibility you would need to examine the gut of the organisms.
I would bet they would "die slowly" as they ingest and try to digest, but only pass it. It would be about the same as a human eating a lego every other day. Probably won't hurt ya in the short term, but it can become stuck, and it does require energy to pass through the digestive system. And it's less nutrition than a McDonalds cheeseburger.

[KafudaFish]

Originally Posted by doctorwhoreefer

How do you know plankton is being ingested?

I would perform a gut content analysis or if the species was one with a status I would run a carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis.

What does that have to do with my question of how do you know that our tank inhabitants are consuming magic eraser and that this can be a cause of mysterious deaths in tanks that it is being used or has been used in?

As you stated no one is looking (that we know).

[Electrobes]

I am trying to follow this thread, but KafudaFish's avatar keeps making laugh. Man I am tired...

I guess, in part that I should contribute something to this debate, why are Magic Erasers used in place of other cleaners like scrubbing pads, etc?

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by KafudaFish

I would perform a gut content analysis or if the species was one with a status I would run a carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis.

What does that have to do with my question of how do you know that our tank inhabitants are consuming magic eraser and that this can be a cause of mysterious deaths in tanks that it is being used or has been used in?

As you stated no one is looking (that we know).

You know what I'm saying. Corals are like children, they stick whatever they can in their mouths. So why would someone rub foam that obviously comes apart as it works, and fits perfectly in the corals mouths and even fishes gills in the tank?

And I would say we know because of what we're seeing in nature. Humans say "oh this plastic, its great stuff!" And what happens? Because of multiple scenarios including mechanical abrasion there's now micron sized particles in the ocean causing all sorts of things, death only one aspect. Read the links, I posted them because they relate.

[d2mini]

Originally Posted by Electrobes

I guess, in part that I should contribute something to this debate, why are Magic Erasers used in place of other cleaners like scrubbing pads, etc?

Because they work so dang good.
Especially on acrylic.
I never really need them on my glass tanks, but my acrylic refugium and acrylic frag tank seemed so porous! Everything would stick to it like glue. Using an old credit card to scrape the brown stuff off worked ok, but the magic eraser was like... magic. I hate acrylic. lol

I agree though... where possible, use a mag cleaner.
The new Tunze Care magnets are pretty awesome.
I retired my Algae Free mag.

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by d2mini

Because they work so dang good.
Especially on acrylic.
I never really need them on my glass tanks, but my acrylic refugium and acrylic frag tank seemed so porous! Everything would stick to it like glue. Using an old credit card to scrape the brown stuff off worked ok, but the magic eraser was like... magic. I hate acrylic. lol

I agree though... where possible, use a mag cleaner.
The new Tunze Care magnets are pretty awesome.
I retired my Algae Free mag.

Ya, I've been tempted to try em, I do think they are amazing. I just can't get passed the probable contamination aspect.

It's funny though I just stumbled across this today, who would have ever thought washing our clothes could affect the Earth's ecosystem like this. This borders on my apprehension to not say anything when people are talking about the eraser...

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...ibers-28119989

[LatinP]

Originally Posted by KafudaFish

The product has been evaluated and does not require warning labeling under California Proposition 65 so how bad can it be?

Not bad at all if you use it for it's intended purpose, the product was made (and evaluated) to clean surfaces not the insides of saltwater tanks. Especially ones which are filled with water and stocked with living marine livestock.

[Nina51]

i've been using them for a couple of years now with no obvious negative effects.

[KafudaFish]

True but there are many items we use in our tanks that aren't intended for or stated on the packages to be used in our tanks.

South down sand, Portland cement for man made rock, and pickling lime come to mind.

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by KafudaFish

True but there are many items we use in our tanks that aren't intended for or stated on the packages to be used in our tanks.

South down sand, Portland cement for man made rock, and pickling lime come to mind.

Those have been closely observed though from various tests.

There's no test unfortunately for this short of putting gut content under a microscope. At the same time it's better than a 50% chance it will end up in the water(because it's being used in a way it can come apart given physics; in addition to the mere presence ) and cause problems similar to all the 'plastic etc' research going on.

I thought this was a good point of the article, but overall, why even take the chance with the tank if you really care about it? This is an easier concept from a scientific perspective than the chemistry presented by portland cement, pickling lime, or sand. Microscopic plastic particulates floating around in a coral tank. :/

"The longer the plastic remains inside an organism, the greater the likelihood that it will impact the organism in some way," Mason said

[Triggercdog]

Originally Posted by Nina51

i've been using them for a couple of years now with no obvious negative effects.

So have I....in fact my French angel actually eats the little pieces that fall off...is it going to get stuck in his gills and cause him to die??? Don't think so, been doing that for about a year and the fish is healthy with vibrant colors....there's nothing wrong with magic erasers....as long as you keep to the original ones...don't buy into the hype or speculation.....these corals and fish we keep are hardy under the correct parameters....a lot of people blame stuff on things that they think are not "reef safe" but fail to realize that it could be something else like water quality....just my 2 pennies....

[KafudaFish]

Originally Posted by doctorwhoreefer

Those have been closely observed though from various tests.

There's no test unfortunately for this short of putting gut content under a microscope. At the same time it's better than a 50% chance it will end up in the water(because it's being used in a way it can come apart given physics; in addition to the mere presence ) and cause problems similar to all the 'plastic etc' research going on.

I thought this was a good point of the article, but overall, why even take the chance with the tank if you really care about it? This is an easier concept from a scientific perspective than the chemistry presented by portland cement, pickling lime, or sand. Microscopic plastic particulates floating around in a coral tank. :/

"The longer the plastic remains inside an organism, the greater the likelihood that it will impact the organism in some way," Mason said

Do you see the flaw in your statement? You stated there is no way of knowing if an organism is consuming magic eraser yet you stated there is greater than a 50% of it ending up in the water column. This says nothing about the chances of it being ingested even if it is in the column.

Again how do you know and more importantly how can you state that the use of it is a cause of mysterious deaths?

[ghostman]

Originally Posted by KafudaFish

Do you see the flaw in your statement? You stated there is no way of knowing if an organism is consuming magic eraser yet you stated there is greater than a 50% of it ending up in the water column. This says nothing about the chances of it being ingested even if it is in the column.

Again how do you know and more importantly how can you state that the use of it is a cause of mysterious deaths?

The entire argument is flawed. There is no actual "proof" one way or another, yet these items are listed as "facts". They are not, simply conjecture. What's next? The hazards of filter socks?