When I read the many apoplectic and incredulous responses that 'oh my how could he say it's the cause of all RTN' I think some people are missing the interpretation potential of that statement. I do not have any communicae with the Dr. but from the bit that I've read so far there seems to be a disconnect in that many people are crediting param swings, light stress, and other events that could often precipitate a coral or multiple corals exhibiting RTN symptoms. Now, is the Dr. saying that RTN, as in the tissue loss itself, is caused by the philaster parasite regardless of the initial impetus for them to gain infection in the coral? Or is the contention that every RTN event is actually induced by an overabundance of these parasites in a given system with other tank issues/stressors being only coincidental and potentially concurrent rather than contributive? This is what I'd like to know.
I'm honestly shocked how dismissive many posters seem. It's not as if someone is pointing a gun at anyone's head to buy the stuff. Heck we spend boku bucks on all kinds of equipment and other tank stuff that may improve our reefs with no guarantees of success. I see this as something that may hold potential benefit. Let's wait til there's more data before we start saying this is snake oil. I for one don't feel we have enough info in either direction to make a solid determination in the matter.
I'm honestly shocked how dismissive many posters seem. It's not as if someone is pointing a gun at anyone's head to buy the stuff. Heck we spend boku bucks on all kinds of equipment and other tank stuff that may improve our reefs with no guarantees of success. I see this as something that may hold potential benefit. Let's wait til there's more data before we start saying this is snake oil. I for one don't feel we have enough info in either direction to make a solid determination in the matter.