*COPPERSAFE WARNING* along with Research on Hanna Instruments High Range Copper Checker

[Kyl]

There's two issues in the thread:

That the dosing potency of the CopperSafe has possibly changed, and is now much stronger so less is required to achieve theraputic levels. If going by habit, this could lead to livestock losses from copper over-dosing. The other is that the API kit kind of sucks, and an option previously dismissed seems to work perfectly well with the high range chelated copper methods, at least with far better / easier accuracy than visual.

 

[HotRocks]

I’ve read all of this and thought I had it figured out, but am confused now. I thought that the initial concern was that if we blindly used the box instructions for dosing, it would overdose to potentially lethal levels. Now, I’m starting to see what I think are people making it sound like it’s the actual testing that is the issue??? I get that the Hanna checker may work and that’s awesome, but is it a dosing issue or testing or both? I usually ramp up my copper over a few days and test every time before and after I add, so I was never worried about overdosing.

So not to be confusing, there are a couple of issues at hand.

Issue one
Concentrations on Copper Safe are lately found to be inconsistent. If you are dosing, and testing and have confidence in your visual testing, I think there is nothing to worry about.
I do have a bottle, of Copper Safe that if dosed exactly per instructions yields +/-3.0ppm Twice the therapeutic level. Not to make it more confusing, but a lot of people were dosing more than instructed in the past to get to a therapeutic level when it was believed to contain a concentration of 1.16-1.17ppm. I think the whole goal was to be able to dose by measuring, with a visual test to verify, meaning you had two ways of being sure you were on point. I still don't know what to think of it all as manufacturer says concentration has been the same for years. Yet tons of people are reaching the therapeutic level now at or before the given instructions, when in the past that was not the case.

Second Issue
Visual testing. Some people have no problem with it, others struggle. There are just so many variables that can change the way you see the test. Lighting, person viewings eyesight, etc. For example the API test, it seems to be best way to read is in natural daylight, viewing vial from the top, and some say to squint. Next problem is the large jumps in the comparison colors they provide. Like going from 2.0 to 4.0, and the color isn't much different between the two. From 0-2.0 you get 4 comparisons with much more difference in color. Whereas if you have a digital reading, and it is accurate, it removes all the variables that play into visual testing.

 

[puffy127]

I think the overdosing was due to a potential change in formula or bad batch of Coppersafe AND not testing. Had testing been done during ramp up, even with the API kit, it should have been noticed. I'm not sure why you need to differentiate between 2 and 4 ppm as you shouldn't be up in that range anyways. While the Hanna may provide better accuracy and telling whether you are therapeutic, by no means is it necessary to prevent the overdosing.

 

[Big G]

I'm not sure why you need to differentiate between 2 and 4 ppm as you shouldn't be up in that range anyways.

That the other issue is that many are considering switching to Copper Power and their suggested level is 2.5 ppm. So the API test kit doesn't help a whole lot because it jumps from 2.0 to 4.0 and is very difficult to test for 2.5ppm target.

 

[HotRocks]

I think the overdosing was due to a potential change in formula or bad batch of Coppersafe AND not testing. Had testing been done during ramp up, even with the API kit, it should have been noticed. I'm not sure why you need to differentiate between 2 and 4 ppm as you shouldn't be up in that range anyways. While the Hanna may provide better accuracy and telling whether you are therapeutic, by no means is it necessary to prevent the overdosing.

I agree with you 100% (Not testing, was not good. Although easy to become a creature of habit and follow normal process that has never been an issue) I definitely learned that lesson the hard way. Just in the future it may be easier to maintain at or slightly above the therapeutic mark, with an affordable digital testing method, for more copper sensitive species. Logically speaking you should be easily able to achieve with the combination of measuring and testing if product used is consistent.

 

[drstardust]

I’m going to make a random prediction now — a new member will be participating on this thread shortly. It will be someone brand new to R2R, and this will be the preponderance of their participation. They will be negating everything that has been said, or attempting to do so.

Just a harmless prediction, let’s see what happens. That’s all I will say.

....oh boy

 

[Big G]

I agree with you 100% (Not testing, was not good. Although easy to become a creature of habit and follow normal process that has never been an issue) I definitely learned that lesson the hard way. Just in the future it may be easier to maintain at or slightly above the therapeutic mark, with an affordable digital testing method, for more copper sensitive species. Logically speaking you should be easily able to achieve with the combination of measuring and testing if product used is consistent.

+1 Right now I have several fish in Coppersafe that are copper sensitive: puffer, wrasse, anthia. Would be real nice to know definitively the level of copper. Been real nerve wracking with all this going on.

 

[puffy127]

I agree with you 100% (Not testing, was not good. Although easy to become a creature of habit and follow normal process that has never been an issue) I definitely learned that lesson the hard way. Just in the future it may be easier to maintain at or slightly above the therapeutic mark, with an affordable digital testing method, for more copper sensitive species. Logically speaking you should be easily able to achieve with the combination of measuring and testing if product used is consistent.

I hear you about creatures of habit and I've certainly learned from your mistake and I think we all are sufficiently warned. I appreciate all your work on the Hanna tester and by the looks of your testing so far, it is already far superior to API and will be a great help in differentiating between 1 and 2 ppm, which is greatly needed.

 

[HotRocks]

....oh boy

Lol, I know what he is getting at.
I would never expect the makers of the product in question to openly admit there was an issue anyway, it would open them up to way to much liability. Not to mention there are far too may issues at play, and many other parameters that have to be kept within range that could also contribute to an issue in saltwater fish, to be able to actually do anything about it. Which isn't my intent anyway.

 

[drstardust]

Lol, I know what he is getting at.
I would never expect the makers of the product in question to openly admit there was an issue anyway, it would open them up to way to much liability. Not to mention there are far to many factors at play, and to many other issues that could also contribute to an issue in saltwater fish, to be able to actually do anything about it. Which isn't my intent anyway.

Indeed, sir

 

[deedubz]

Lol, I know what he is getting at.
I would never expect the makers of the product in question to openly admit there was an issue anyway, it would open them up to way to much liability. Not to mention there are far too may issues at play, and many other many parameters that have to be kept within range that could also contribute to an issue in saltwater fish, to be able to actually do anything about it. Which isn't my intent anyway.

He's so not invited to my birthday party.

 

[Huskymaniac]

Just for giggles i got the one tank down to 2.0 with the Hannah Test. I still cant tell the difference between 2 and 4. I had my wife check in and she said its probably like 6 or 7 since its darker than 4.

 

[DanielJameS]

Just for giggles i got the one tank down to 2.0 with the Hannah Test. I still cant tell the difference between 2 and 4. I had my wife check in and she said its probably like 6 or 7 since its darker than 4.

[emoji15]

 

[4FordFamily]

Ok, I’ve had time to digest this.

Disclaimer: I am a long-time proponent of coppersafe and have used it a lot in the past with success.

1) the roughly 1.17 PPM dosing instructions on the bottle are not a therapeutic dose of chelated copper. 1.5-2.0 is, however.

2) the dosage on the current bottle has led to over 3PPM in recent weeks for many hobbyists

3) this is not from poor dosing or testing — it’s been tested with API, Salifert, and Hanna Copper Checker. Interestingly, the copper checker by Hanna is 100% spot on at reading the dosage on Copper Power (also a chelated product such as coppersafe) and Cupramine (which is lower range ionic copper). It’s only coppersafe and dosing instructions on coppersafe that is causing people to overdose and kill fish.

4) in a series of emails to many concerned users, they have stated that fish can safely handle 4x the recommended copper on the bottle. That’s about 5.0PPM of copper. This is completely incorrect and leading me to think they have no idea what they are talking about.

5) Their own website advises against overdosing, but somehow 5PPM is ok? (4 X 1.17 = 4.68PPM)

6) I’d like them to point me to any study showing marine fish can handle copper levels of 4.5-5PPM. It’s pretty commonly accepted that after 2.5-3PPM most fish will start to die. Copper is, afterall, a poison. This is of course why dosing it correctly is keystone. Quadrupling a dosage of poison is not likely going to end well

7) the high levels of copper due to incorrect dosage instructions and potency have personally led to $2,000 of fish deaths. Cloudy water, lethargic fish, eye infections, and many other symptoms occur in high copper concentrations and ironically that’s what I and others have been observing. There are many others coming forward with similar issues.

I’d have a lot more respect if they came out and admitted they had an issue rather than what appears to be covering it up. I am, admittedly, pretty heated. I don’t like killing fish and I thought it was some mysterious bacteria bloom or infection killing my fish...

Now, in TRUTH all of us SHOULD have been testing copper more often, and this could have been prevented. However, I don’t feel that it’s unreasonable to expect the manufacturer’s instructions to be accurate (or at least in the right ballpark) AND result in a therapeutic dose of their product. Neither of those two things are achieved here.

 

[DanielJameS]

Testing and it’s reliability are such a huge part of this hobby, particularly when you are walking a tight rope like copper. I currently am at a loss for what to do as I have fish displaying symptoms of what could be copper intolerance, but am also taking on the Goliath that is Velvet. Granted we’re talking about API here for the most part, but there is zero margin for error with copper. There’s nothing worse than being stuck in the position of saying, “do I do a bunch of emergency water changes? - Do I leave it alone? - Do I move the fish?” Every single one of these things can and will kill your fish depending on the circumstances, all because you can’t rely on a test kit.

I wish amazon could deliver a Hanna copper checker tonight because I’d probably buy it, by tomorrow it might be too late....

Frustrating...

 

[4FordFamily]

Testing and it’s reliability are such a huge part of this hobby, particularly when you are walking a tight rope like copper. I currently am at a loss for what to do as I have fish displaying symptoms of what could be copper intolerance, but am also taking on the Goliath that is Velvet. Granted we’re talking about API here for the most part, but there is zero margin for error with copper. There’s nothing worse than being stuck in the position of saying, “do I do a bunch of emergency water changes? - Do I leave it alone? - Do I move the fish?” Every single one of these things can and will kill your fish depending on the circumstances, all because you can’t rely on a test kit.

I wish amazon could deliver a Hanna copper checker tonight because I’d probably buy it, by tomorrow it might be too late....

Frustrating...

Believe me, we understand! Each batch of fish we’ve received have had velvet in the past few months. @HotRocks and I have 2-3 full qt at any given time. We’d be slowing down by now if we had know about Hanna and coppersafe shortcomings before now!

 

[deedubz]

Testing and it’s reliability are such a huge part of this hobby, particularly when you are walking a tight rope like copper. I currently am at a loss for what to do as I have fish displaying symptoms of what could be copper intolerance, but am also taking on the Goliath that is Velvet. Granted we’re talking about API here for the most part, but there is zero margin for error with copper. There’s nothing worse than being stuck in the position of saying, “do I do a bunch of emergency water changes? - Do I leave it alone? - Do I move the fish?” Every single one of these things can and will kill your fish depending on the circumstances, all because you can’t rely on a test kit.

I wish amazon could deliver a Hanna copper checker tonight because I’d probably buy it, by tomorrow it might be too late....

Frustrating...

I'm in the same boat. I started dosing coppersafe yesterday for velvet. I'm at the somewhere between 1-2 ppm range. No clue if it's 1.2 or 1.9.. I'm afraid to dose a single ml more for fear of wiping out my fish but if I'm only at 1.4 the velvet will do it for me. I bought the Hannah tester yesterday, but it apparently didn't get processed until today and won't ship until tomorrow.

 

[deedubz]

Wait... The Hannah kit DOESN'T work with coppersafe?

 

[4FordFamily]

Wait... The Hannah kit DOESN'T work with coppersafe?

It works fine with coppersafe. Coppersafe blames us for testing. It shouldn’t be any different than copper power. Hanna is on par with API tester for coppersafe

 

[DanielJameS]

Believe me, we understand! Each batch of fish we’ve received have had velvet in the past few months. @HotRocks and I have 2-3 full qt at any given time. We’d be slowing down by now if we had know about Hanna and coppersafe shortcomings before now!

Well In my case, my last experience with coppersafe was good, but that was over a year ago so this new development makes me glad I went with copper power instead.

But this dang API test kit...I mean I should know better with the API ammonia inaccuracies, but when it comes down to

Do something with what you have or:

Fish die

I’m choosing the former, diving in no matter what. Makes fallow even harder because these are MY fish, and I hate watching them struggle, suffer and ultimately perish, I just want my logic and rationale to coincide with what I see on ANY test kit, seems like a big ask in 2018 when cars park themselves and we can’t even get proper .25-.5 increments in color [emoji849]