Toxins in water / Abstract logic

[OnceTrueFalseBr]

Originally Posted by Nor_Cal_Guy

I agree, it seems in my naïve observation, that after a water change, I see an improvement in the extension of corals polyps.

Ok, SO after a water change you see an improvement. There are still unidentified variables attached to it.

Like what was were your trace elements looking like before and after the water change.

example.

lets say you change the water and THEN test for trace elements and water parameters.

What if you find that everything is in check now. so you are confident that the water change brought everything in check.

However, what if before the water change your magnesium was VERY VERY low and Cal was very very high. if you didn't test to see this and then did the water change and balanced out the levels you would be assuming that simply changing the water fixed the problem.

however what if every week at the same time your parameters keep swinging like this, and the only thing "fixing" the look of your corals is the rise in magnesium AFTER the change. in respect to that what would have happened to the look of your corals if all you did was test first and doses for magnesium when needed? make any sense?

also when people say chemical warfare and needing to change water because of this. I can understand having a 300 gallon heavily stocked colony tank, but i am sure (and I'M assuming now lol) that the people who are afraid of all the alleopathic coral chemical warfare happening simply have like 3 or 4 LPS frags and a few fish in their 55 gallon LOL

[reefgeezer]

I'm a weekly testing & water change voter. I don't do the water changes to balance major balances like calcium, alkalinity, & magnesium. These are kept in check by dosing. The weekly checks assure that the major parameters are ok before water changes are done. The 10%-15% or so I change at any one time doesn't effect those parameters much.

[Reef Frog]

I was doing some maintenence the other day and had my hands & fore arms in the tank. Nothing major but my arms itched and looked ever so slightly blotchy for a while. No big deal but maybe something new was in the water or something that is always there was increasing in quantity. I have absolutely no problem diluting whatever it was.

My tank also seems to perk up a little after a WC after going a while without one. Not a scientific observation but it seems to be a valid clue.

[karimwassef]

My 2 cents.

I like a data driven approach, but not a desire for absolute answers.
Without a chemical lab (as in fictional CSI), the exact proportions of compounds in your saltwater is unknowable by a hobbyist. Does it matter apart from curiosity and controversy? Only if the incremental knowledge will make you a better reef keeper.

However, empirical data can be used to evaluate a desirable vs. undesirable state. I've been both a non-changer and an avid-changer. We've all seen tanks all over the spectrum. In my assessment, it's a necessary part of tank hygiene.

You could survive as a bum never taking a shower unless it rains. Or you could shower every morning. Both live, but who is healthier?

The best reefs I have ever seen included a regimen of monthly if not weekly water changes.
Best = polyp expansion, growth rates, color.

So let's collect data for these three output variables as a function of WC frequency. You'll need a lot of data points over a reasonably long time frame.

[tmz]

One can guess about which organics gac ,skimming with or without ozone pulls out and they do take some but a water change is inclusive in terms of what it takes out and puts back.

1% per day is my practice.

sort of like Christians claiming everything as a SIN

That is offensive, not apt to the subject and against the RC rules. I have no interest in discussing it or anything else with you.

[OnceTrueFalseBr]

Originally Posted by tmz

One can guess about which organics gac ,skimming with or without ozone pulls out and they do take some but a water change is inclusive in terms of what it takes out and puts back.

1% per day is my practice.

sort of like Christians claiming everything as a SIN

That is offensive, not apt to the subject and against the RC rules. I have no interest in discussing it or anything else with you.

Ciao!

[OnceTrueFalseBr]

Originally Posted by karimwassef

My 2 cents.

I like a data driven approach, but not a desire for absolute answers.
Without a chemical lab (as in fictional CSI), the exact proportions of compounds in your saltwater is unknowable by a hobbyist. Does it matter apart from curiosity and controversy? Only if the incremental knowledge will make you a better reef keeper.

However, empirical data can be used to evaluate a desirable vs. undesirable state. I've been both a non-changer and an avid-changer. We've all seen tanks all over the spectrum. In my assessment, it's a necessary part of tank hygiene.

You could survive as a bum never taking a shower unless it rains. Or you could shower every morning. Both live, but who is healthier?

The best reefs I have ever seen included a regimen of monthly if not weekly water changes.
Best = polyp expansion, growth rates, color.

So let's collect data for these three output variables as a function of WC frequency. You'll need a lot of data points over a reasonably long time frame.

I have a lot of husbandry to do this coming year! LOL

[Nor_Cal_Guy]

Originally Posted by OnceTrueFalseBr

Ok, SO after a water change you see an improvement. There are still unidentified variables attached to it.

Like what was were your trace elements looking like before and after the water change.

example.

lets say you change the water and THEN test for trace elements and water parameters.

What if you find that everything is in check now. so you are confident that the water change brought everything in check.

However, what if before the water change your magnesium was VERY VERY low and Cal was very very high. if you didn't test to see this and then did the water change and balanced out the levels you would be assuming that simply changing the water fixed the problem.

however what if every week at the same time your parameters keep swinging like this, and the only thing "fixing" the look of your corals is the rise in magnesium AFTER the change. in respect to that what would have happened to the look of your corals if all you did was test first and doses for magnesium when needed? make any sense?

...

A reef is an unidentified variable. It's a living, evolving life form. Even in a glass box in your own home. It's never the same. Changing the water has historically proven to help the quality of the closed loop system in our home reefs.

The point is, water changes can help balance the elements present in the water. After all, we are keeping exotic animals in a glass box in OUR homes.

[karimwassef]

Another important variable in my experience is the air quality in the region of gas exchange. CO2 levels, cooking smoke, car exhaust, fresh air, insect spray, air fresheners, etc... While these chemicals are sometimes hard to identify in an aqueous form, they do impact the captive reef.

[CuzzA]

Originally Posted by OnceTrueFalseBr

Ciao!

Just a tip, the next time you want to develop a great thread you should consider refraining from making blanket condemnations of an entire majority of the population.

At first this thread had promise, but was completely sidetracked by adding a ridiculous statement. Even more ridiculous is the fact that it's Christmas Eve. Which has me pondering if you're celebrating Christmas and if so that's quite hypocritical.

Or the fact that you just wrote off TMZ who is on the ReefKeeping Staff... A source of information you probably frequent often. I don't see you making a lot of friends around here with posts like that.

It's a shame too, as this thread could have been a quality thread. But again, the insult completely distracts the topic.

Good luck.

[jason2459]

Its not the first time he's lashed out at well respected members of which I've learned a considerable amount from or has posted with flamming/trolling intent.

[OnceTrueFalseBr]

Originally Posted by jason2459

Its not the first time he's lashed out at well respected members of which I've learned a considerable amount from or has posted with flamming/trolling intent.

I cant control who takes offense to things :/

If someone cant find humor in my comparisons thats on them not me. I never directed that at anyone in particular.

I thought this was a science based site and not a cathedral, given the fact we are in a chemistry thread...

P.s. Did anyone watch the Nye vs Ham debate?

[OnceTrueFalseBr]

Originally Posted by CuzzA

Just a tip, the next time you want to develop a great thread you should consider refraining from making blanket condemnations of an entire majority of the population.

At first this thread had promise, but was completely sidetracked by adding a ridiculous statement. Even more ridiculous is the fact that it's Christmas Eve. Which has me pondering if you're celebrating Christmas and if so that's quite hypocritical.

Or the fact that you just wrote off TMZ who is on the ReefKeeping Staff... A source of information you probably frequent often. I don't see you making a lot of friends around here with posts like that.

It's a shame too, as this thread could have been a quality thread. But again, the insult completely distracts the topic.

Good luck.

Although my conparisin was a form of mockery, I dont think people should feel that a personal attack.

i guess quality is variable to each individual.

Merry Christmas!

[bertoni]

Okay, let's keep this thread civil in tone. I haven't started deleting posts yet, but I'm getting tempted.

[morty]

Originally Posted by OnceTrueFalseBr

Although my conparisin was a form of mockery, I dont think people should feel that a personal attack.

I don't understand why "a form of mockery" should ever be perceived as anything OTHER than some form of personal attack.

And regarding form, I think most would agree that your "conparisin" served NO use in defining your question; any reader would have understood your gist before your "religion analogy". So by making one, IMO you just presented yourself as someone who wanted to appear clever and snarky.

Originally Posted by OnceTrueFalseBr

i guess quality is variable to each individual.

I have no idea what that means.

[OnceTrueFalseBr]

Originally Posted by morty

I don't understand why "a form of mockery" should ever be perceived as anything OTHER than some form of personal attack.

And regarding form, I think most would agree that your "conparisin" served NO use in defining your question; any reader would have understood your gist before your "religion analogy". So by making one, IMO you just presented yourself as someone who wanted to appear clever and snarky.



I have no idea what that means.

Now I'm feeling personally attacked. Now what do we do?

And that was an honest typo. Not clever or snarky. But now that i see it with fresh eyes not 3am, it is quite intetesting in context.

[billsreef]

I think we are done here.