Anyone detect clear evidence of a fluoride effect?

[Pod_01]

Ok . Then maybe I should not bother with the photos.

Just my opinion.
Pictures are great way to compare growth, health of corals over time. I do like to see photos from others so I can figure out if my corals look similar, different.
I think there is value.

Colour reproduction on the other hand is best done by professional photographers.

 

[rtparty]

The moment FM and ChatGPT are brought into the conversation, you know the science isn’t legit

 

[Heres_doe_]

I work in the software space. Please please do not use ChatGPT or other AI for a reliable information source.

All the AI language models work by predicting the best set of words to follow based on statistics from ingesting large amounts of data. So ultimately if there is garbage in you will get garbage out. It can reassemble language it finds on the internet from any random post.

This problem in the AI space is called “hallucination” and no AI system has yet solved it, so please don’t use it for accurate information.

Hallucination (artificial intelligence) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Says idk how true this is. I also had to help it with a mathematical equation it got wrong few weeks ago. I know it’s not precise.

 

[Righteous]

Says idk how true this is. I also had to help it with a mathematical equation it got wrong few weeks ago. I know it’s not precise.

“ by 2023, analysts estimated that chatbots hallucinate as much as 27% of the time, with factual errors present in 46% of their responses”

 

[Righteous]

When you google something and google gives you an AI overview at the very top, they bury the fact that it’s most likely bad information. You have to click on the tiny link that says “Generative AI is experimental. Learn more” and then burried multiple clicks in is this disclaimer:

I think it’s pretty horrible they put these AI responses at the top, and most people are going to think it’s authoritative and factual answers.

But they don’t want to appear like they are trailing the competition, so it’s $$ over people actually getting correct or potentially dangerous information.

/End Public Service Announcement

 

[BeanAnimal]

I use OpenAI regularly for work and as a quick replacement for google (as compared to wading through pages of click bait, and advertising)... It is wrong far more than that and "hallucinates" for more than that. It can't keep track of more than the last few exchanges and will pretty much tell you whatever you want to hear by confirming your questions and playing into your own confirmation bias.

LLMs are contextual adlib search engines. They repeat whatever they have sucked in that makes linguistic sense, not logical sense. They are great tools if YOU ALREADY have a pretty good idea what you need to know and need to fill in gaps or organize your thoughts. they are terrible at providing factual and verified information.

Yes. All variables the same. I corrected iodine, manganese, iron, zinc, vanadium in that order. Over a period of 2 months. Initially i was trying to track down better colors in SPS. I also noticed when i did water changes, my polyp extension was better that night or the next day and would gradually fall back off.

Several ICP tests were low on flourine. Around 7/30/24 I finally dosed sodium flouride from .6ppm to 1.5ppm and saw a night and day difference in SPS polyp extension, notably very good PE during day time which was not usual.

Have a buddy who has also seen the same when i gave him some to dose into his tank that was also low.

I personally believe flouride to be a critical trace for a heaviily stocked SPS system, on the assumption better PE = happier/healthier coral. I have some.better coloration but nothing observable from flouride alone nor materially different.

Respectfully, I don't see a difference other than exposure and saturation and focus.

 

[areefer01]

Reminds me a bit of the Honey Nut Cheerios box. 'Can help lower cholesterol'...

• With a proper diet
• Maybe they can help
• Maybe they are neutral
• Maybe it tastes great
• And maybe it just makes you feel good

 

[Righteous]

Respectfully, I don't see a difference other than exposure and saturation and focus.

I see a notable difference on the bottom acro. If you look at the ends of the colony you’ll see they match a lot closer than the center of the colony as well which has a noticeable lightening. I’ve done photography as a hobby since college, and that appears to be either a legitimate change, or purposeful photo manipulation by burning in the center (which also looks doubtful)

Yes photos are tricky, but I think we also have to ask, does it match with what the aquarists are seeing with their own eyes.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I see a notable difference on the bottom acro. If you look at the ends of the colony you’ll see they match a lot closer than the center of the colony as well which has a noticeable lightening. I’ve done photography as a hobby since college, and that appears to be either a legitimate change, or purposeful photo manipulation by burning in the center (which also looks doubtful)

Yes photos are tricky, but I think we also have to ask, does it match with what the aquarists are seeing with their own eyes.

FWIW I had an enlarger and was loading my own 35mm cassettes in grade school... That was the late 70s annd early 80s. By the mid 80's I was fiddling around with color processing and printing. Photography has been a lifelong hobby for me.

I don't doubt some things change coral coloration and growth. I don't want to sidetrack this thread with my skepticism or call anybody out, but asking a group of believers and non-believers if they see results is going to most break down partly lines, even if placebos were used.

Judging photographs for subtle (or not so subtle) color improvements (or regression) is a fools errand either way.

If I look at the RM, Zeovit, or FM fan groups, every item on the menu discretely provides "noticeable" improvement in color, growth, polyp extension, fluorescence, etc. Maybe one or two or 5 of those items do. But if you add up all of the claims then the tanks that use all of those products would have compounding effects that would absolutely knock your socks off and be unattainable without the use of all of those products. I have yet to see that (even remotely) be the case.

 

[ReeferZ1227]

I use OpenAI regularly for work and as a quick replacement for google (as compared to wading through pages of click bait, and advertising)... It is wrong far more than that and "hallucinates" for more than that. It can't keep track of more than the last few exchanges and will pretty much tell you whatever you want to hear by confirming your questions and playing into your own confirmation bias.

LLMs are contextual adlib search engines. They repeat whatever they have sucked in that makes linguistic sense, not logical sense. They are great tools if YOU ALREADY have a pretty good idea what you need to know and need to fill in gaps or organize your thoughts. they are terrible at providing factual and verified information.


Respectfully, I don't see a difference other than exposure and saturation and focus.

Well youre also a major contrarian to most things.

The 8/13 picture it was ticked off, but you can objectively see more PE on the exposed yellow of the polyps. the 8/29 pic all polyps are considerably more extended.

Its not a matter of saturation but exposure. The new growth is a deeper blue, but i dont attribute that to F. The PE i absolutely do. I didnt take these pics to document this as an experiment.

Heres a picture at peak whitez s23u, pro mode, WB 10k.

I used to have abysmal PE during the day and never knew why. Suddenly when NaF came into the picture thats no longer the case.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Well youre also a major contrarian to most things.

The 8/13 picture it was ticked off, but you can objectively see more PE on the exposed yellow of the coralites. the 8/29 pic all polyps are considerably more extended.

Its not a matter of saturation but exposure. The new growth is a deeper blue, but i dont attribute that to F. The PE i absolutely do. I didnt take these pics to document this as an experiment.

Heres a picture at peak whitez s23u, pro mode, WB 10k.

I used to have abysmal PE during the day and never knew why. Suddenly when NaF came into the picture thats no longer the case.

Thanks, but comparing two different photos like that is somewhat pointless without rather strict controls.

FWIW - some days my corals have great polyp extensions and others not so much. Trace? Food? Mood? Fresh Poop? Etc....

I am not saying that the fluoride does or does not have an effect on things, but photos like these don't help persuade me one way or the other.

 

[ReeferZ1227]

I see a notable difference on the bottom acro. If you look at the ends of the colony you’ll see they match a lot closer than the center of the colony as well which has a noticeable lightening. I’ve done photography as a hobby since college, and that appears to be either a legitimate change, or purposeful photo manipulation by burning in the center (which also looks doubtful)

Yes photos are tricky, but I think we also have to ask, does it match with what the aquarists are seeing with their own eyes.

Negative i took alot of pictures of that colony documenting its rather fast growth. I was using a 15k orphek filter, raw photo, wb at 12k, exposure at -.8 for the photo (best low light iso/shutter combo), and then further backing down exposure to highlight but not exagerate colors.

The last picture of that colony was likely just promode, and since its grown out of frame it was just a poor quality photo. The additional green is representative of the increase in PE, nothing else. Skin underneath was the same orange as you noted.

Current pic under whites

 

[areefer01]

If I look at the RM, Zeovit, or FM fan groups, every item on the menu discretely provides "noticeable" improvement in color, growth, polyp extension, fluorescence, etc.

This is true for a good many of things in this hobby. Engineered to grow a thriving reef... Catchy, right?

Hardware, additives, the whole nine yards.

 

[ReeferZ1227]

Thanks, but comparing two different photos like that is somewhat pointless without rather strict controls.

FWIW - some days my corals have great polyp extensions and others not so much. Trace? Food? Mood? Fresh Poop? Etc....

I am not saying that the fluoride does or does not have an effect on things, but photos like these don't help persuade me one way or the other.

Agree. My corals constantly have good PE now, perhaps its worth conducting an experiment on your own accord. I can attest the PE is dramatically better, round the clock, no other variable changes, noted within 36hrs of correction, and any times i slack notice better PE shortly after a bigger/more frequent dose.

Im not a fan of snake oil, misinformation, nor the overwhelming amount of bad information in a hobby that requires quality information to have just a chance to succeed. I would recommend anyone that doesnt have fluffy SPS to ICP and make a corrective dose of F after ruling out pests and other major params.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Well youre also a major contrarian to most things.

I am a contrarian when the data, logic or science does not support the conclusion being promoted. And when I don't get enough bacon in the morning.

 

[ReeferZ1227]

I am a contrarian when the data, logic or science does not support the conclusion being promoted. And when I don't get enough bacon in the morning.

So then buy a $50 ICP and a $20 thing of reef minerals flourine and bump up to 1.5. Let us know your findings snd contribute to the consensus on if its effective. Youd have to be absolutely blind to not see the PE diff on that tenuis, ignoring color of the photo altogether. The yellow polyps is an objective, measurable giveaway.

 

[Righteous]

I don't want to sidetrack this thread with my skepticism or call anybody out, but asking a group of believers and non-believers if they see results is going to most break down partly lines, even if placebos were used.

I don’t think the purpose of this poll is to prove anything. Obviously a poll on a forum isn’t going to do that.

But what it can do is get a sense of what are the correct questions to ask, and look for trends.

The unknown unknowns often stop good science from proceeding because we don’t know what hypothesis to make or what experiments to run.

If you’ve got half of people saying that dosing low fluorine levels to NSW makes a noticeable improvement in Acropora health.. well then dismissing that claim entirely without investigating it isn’t scientific, it’s confirmation bias.

 

[BeanAnimal]

So then buy a $50 ICP and a $20 thing of reef minerals flourine and bump up to 1.5. Let us know your findings snd contribute to the consensus on if its effective. Youd have to be absolutely blind to not see the PE diff on that tenuis, ignoring color of the photo altogether. The yellow polyps is an objective, measurable giveaway.

Is that $50 ICP test even accurate?

I am not blind, but (again) random photos of "polyp extension" (ignoring color) on any random day are not something I am going to hang my "decided" hat on. Maybe a series with a tripod setup, same time every day with same exact exposure and no post... Sure, we can talk about trends or improvement if it is visible.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I don’t think the purpose of this poll is to prove anything. Obviously a poll on a forum isn’t going to do that.

I am not looking for proof.

If you’ve got half of people saying that dosing low fluorine levels to NSW makes a noticeable improvement in Acropora health.. well then dismissing that claim entirely without investigating it isn’t scientific, it’s confirmation bias.

I am not dismissing it entirely. simply put, photos (at least those provided) do nothing to sway me either way. As for the opinions of those providing data, positive, negative or neutral with regard to fluoride.. It is certainly interesting.

 

[ReeferZ1227]

The intentnof my post wasnt to convince you of anything, but to contribute to my findings as i noticed a mesurable change when i adjusted the topic at hand. I provided what data and visual evidence i had as a by product of my own interest. I am in no way representing this as a legitimate experiment with controls, but your posts arent really contributing the slightest, as you havent measured nor dosed F.

FWIW i have monitored a few specific items via ICP and they have actually fallen inline with expectations based on dosing. The alternative is complete blindness, and no progress towards even anecdotal observations nor healthier, faster growing coral. Theres plenty of reefers that already do that by default, no need to proclaim it.