Understanding Vibrant: Algaefix, Polixetonium Chloride / Busan 77

[jcolliii]

Hear! Hear!

 

[workhz]

For what it’s worth, I’m returning the bottle I bought recently. I knew it was probably algae fix when I bought it but my nitrate does appear to be bottoming out with just a single dose. I’ll tackle my bubble algae some other way.

 

[Dan_P]

The problem in my mind has very little to do with the EPA. The problem is they lied to all of us for years about the fundemental nature of their product. That isn't "marketing".

I am only through page 5 of 8 of this thread and hope this comment isn’t a duplication.

Unregulated businesses in the United States have a fairly wide latitude in what they can claim and how they can claim. Moreover, unless harm is done by the product, I doubt there is much chance that litigation would be successful. Selling colored water is still a booming business in the United States People want to believe in miracles and are willing to pay for them, which makes selling placebos and snake oil a “legitimate” business, though on moral grounds it feels dishonest. An example of a booming snake oil business in the United States is the billion dollar human supplement trade. If such a huge industry can exist, how can we be surprised or disturbed by a mislabeled fish tank product. There are many questionable products being tossed into aquaria, but like human supplements, they are here to stay. We like to think there is an easy fix for our problems.

 

[Dan_P]

Paging Seachem...

A Prime example

 

[GARRIGA]

I am only through page 5 of 8 of this thread and hope this comment isn’t a duplication.

Unregulated businesses in the United States have a fairly wide latitude in what they can claim and how they can claim. Moreover, unless harm is done by the product, I doubt there is much chance that litigation would be successful. Selling colored water is still a booming business in the United States People want to believe in miracles and are willing to pay for them, which makes selling placebos and snake oil a “legitimate” business, though on moral grounds it feels dishonest. An example of a booming snake oil business in the United States is the billion dollar human supplement trade. If such a huge industry can exist, how can we be surprised or disturbed by a mislabeled fish tank product. There are many questionable products being tossed into aquaria, but like human supplements, they are here to stay. We like to think there is an easy fix for our problems.

Health supplements what I was considering as well, however, if any had a pesticide then would those be labeled to expose that fact? That I do not know.

 

[Jeeperz]

For what it’s worth, I’m returning the bottle I bought recently. I knew it was probably algae fix when I bought it but my nitrate does appear to be bottoming out with just a single dose. I’ll tackle my bubble algae some other way.

I'm having extremely good luck with turning off all flow and using h2o2 on individual bubbles, make sure to get it around the base on the rock

Health supplements what I was considering as well, however, if any had a pesticide then would those be labeled to expose that fact? That I do not know.

Just because health supplements didn't go through the fraudulent pay to play fda approval doesn't mean they don't work. Vitamin c, d, b, turmeric, calcium, etc.. all work. Glucosamine is a bit iffy how the body absorbs it. All this stuff is still regulated and if it contained ingredients not listed they could be litigated. There are still standards

 

[mojo8427]

Health supplements what I was considering as well, however, if any had a pesticide then would those be labeled to expose that fact? That I do not know.

They would very much have to label their pesticide. The regulations are cut and dry.

A “pesticide” is any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest; or intended for use as a plant regulator, defoliant or desiccant.

If a person who distributes or sells the product claims, states, or implies by labeling or otherwise (such as, advertising, collateral literature, or verbal statements) that the product can or should be used as a pesticide or that the product contains an active ingredient and that it can be used to manufacture a pesticide, then the product is considered a pesticide 40 CFR 152.15(a).

40 CFR 156.10(a)(5)
False or misleading statements. Pursuant to section 2(q)(1)(A) of the Act, a pesticide or a device declared subject to the Act pursuant to § 152.500, is misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular including both pesticidal and non-pesticidal claims. Examples of statements or representations in the labeling which constitute misbranding include:

(i) A false or misleading statement concerning the composition of the product;
(ii) A false or misleading statement concerning the effectiveness of the product as a pesticide or device;
(iii) A false or misleading statement about the value of the product for purposes other than as a pesticide or device;
(iv) A false or misleading comparison with other pesticides or devices;
(v) Any statement directly or indirectly implying that the pesticide or device is recommended or endorsed by any agency of the Federal Government;
(vi) The name of a pesticide which contains two or more principal active ingredients if the name suggests one or more but not all such principal active ingredients even though the names of the other ingredients are stated elsewhere in the labeling;
(vii) A true statement used in such a way as to give a false or misleading impression to the purchaser;
(viii) Label disclaimers which negate or detract from labeling statements required under the Act and these regulations;
(ix) Claims as to the safety of the pesticide or its ingredients, including statements such as “safe,” “nonpoisonous,” “noninjurious,” “harmless” or “nontoxic to humans and pets” with or without such a qualifying phrase as “when used as directed”; and
(x) Non-numerical and/or comparative statements on the safety of the product, including but not limited to:
(A) “Contains all natural ingredients”;
(B) “Among the least toxic chemicals known”
(C) “Pollution approved”

Source: EPA

 

[GARRIGA]

I'm having extremely good luck with turning off all flow and using h2o2 on individual bubbles, make sure to get it around the base on the rock
Just because health supplements didn't go through the fraudulent pay to play fda approval doesn't mean they don't work. Vitamin c, d, b, turmeric, calcium, etc.. all work. Glucosamine is a bit iffy how the body absorbs it. All this stuff is still regulated and if it contained ingredients not listed they could be litigated. There are still standards

Not all supplements are regulated. Recall in the 90s one product that had a weight loss ingredient which was known to cause health issue. Friend almost had a heart attack on it.

My point being that even health supplements would likely have a label were pesticides used. To the point of this thread. I’m just assuming. Not area of expertise.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I like FIB
Plus at the end of the day its actually R2R who chooses to moderate certain threads and which not to moderate.
Thats been entirely super clear here.
Going to be interesting to see how this one plays out

I will ask the owner of Reef2Reef to respond personally since I do not want to mischaracterize the policy, but I am concerned about the thought the Reef2Reef picks and chooses what to moderate.

 

[a.t.t.r]

I will ask the owner of Reef2Reef to respond personally since I do not want to mischaracterize the policy, but I am concerned about the thought the Reef2Reef picks and chooses what to moderate.

Based on what you see on the first page do you think that results show that what ever two things were tested are identical/near identical?

 

[LRT]

I will ask the owner of Reef2Reef to respond personally since I do not want to mischaracterize the policy, but I am concerned about the thought the Reef2Reef picks and chooses what to moderate.

Hi Randy. Not saying this is happening here but my concern is reciprocal and same rules being applied equally to all across the boards. All any one has to do is search Seneye in top bar to see same claims of lies and name calling and bashing of Seneye by certain folks without any proof. None of those threads where moderated is all im saying.

 

[revhtree]

We’ve not moderated anyone in the thread at this time. I just wanted to remind everyone to stick to the TOS, be civil, don’t call names etc..


Thank you.

 

[Rick Mathew]

I am only through page 5 of 8 of this thread and hope this comment isn’t a duplication.

Unregulated businesses in the United States have a fairly wide latitude in what they can claim and how they can claim. Moreover, unless harm is done by the product, I doubt there is much chance that litigation would be successful. Selling colored water is still a booming business in the United States People want to believe in miracles and are willing to pay for them, which makes selling placebos and snake oil a “legitimate” business, though on moral grounds it feels dishonest. An example of a booming snake oil business in the United States is the billion dollar human supplement trade. If such a huge industry can exist, how can we be surprised or disturbed by a mislabeled fish tank product. There are many questionable products being tossed into aquaria, but like human supplements, they are here to stay. We like to think there is an easy fix for our problems.

Dan you are absolutely correct. The same human flaws that gets us to want a quick and easy solution to the problems we face in our reef systems (a miracle) are the same that want drive us to seek a "simple solution to the complex problem" of product integrity...Just my take on it. I also believe that many products...not just in our world of aquarium care, but in many areas, are good intentions... just bad science...again just my opinion.

Rick

 

[Christoph]

Based on what you see on the first page do you think that results show that what ever two things were tested are identical/near identical?

another chemists opinion here: identical.

there is not much more one could do alongside the NMRs and FTIR

 

[Seneca]

I am only through page 5 of 8 of this thread and hope this comment isn’t a duplication.

Unregulated businesses in the United States have a fairly wide latitude in what they can claim and how they can claim. Moreover, unless harm is done by the product, I doubt there is much chance that litigation would be successful.

No, a company can not make knowingly false statements about the physical composition of matter of their products. That is not part of the latitude.

Yes, it is always true that the award of damages requires there to be damages that require remedy. Ignoring expensive aquarium inhabitants that were killed by this chemical that would not have been killed by any plausible bacteria based product; the cost incurred simply by buying a product with a false composition of matter on it's label are damages that could be remedied. Most of us here would not bother persuing that because it's not worth it for 40 bucks, however some might if they are ticked off enough, or if they also lost more expensive aquatic life (I did, but it still won't be worth my time).

 

[Malcontent]

Loss of livestock would be a products liability case. For deceptive advertising, the injury consists of the extra money you would not have spent had the manufacturer been honest about their product.

Either could be a class action to make it worthwhile.

For example, if Prime doesn't detoxify anything but chlorine and is therefore the same as API Tap Water Conditioner (which costs 1/2 as much) then they could be forced to refund half the sales for a period of 20-30 years. Plus interest.

 

[Brian_68]

Why does Vibrant typically bottom nutrients out as many have reported if it is only an algaecide ? If it only kills algae as an algaecide I would expect nutrients to increase without the nutrient uptake. Does Algaefix bottom them out as well? Seems more to the story.

 

[jeffww]

From a cursory google this doesn't seem to be universal and many people observe increase in phosphates which is in-line with algae dying.

edit: actually it seems like the majority see an increase or no change in nutrients.

The disappearance of nitrate in some cases could be from damage to the nitrogen cycle caused by the polyQAC in these products so while you see decreased nitrates, it's because your beneficial bacteria are no longer functioning correctly. That is my hypothesis. I listened to a podcast from Dr. Tim and he said that the interruption of nitrogen cycle is actually quite common and one would/should track nitrites for this reason as any accumulation of the middle product is a sign of malfunction in your tank's balance.

 

[Brian_68]

From a cursory google this doesn't seem to be universal and many people observe increase in phosphates which is in-line with algae dying.

edit: actually it seems like the majority see an increase or no change in nutrients.

The disappearance of nitrate in some cases could be from damage to the nitrogen cycle caused by the polyQAC in these products so while you see decreased nitrates, it's because your beneficial bacteria are no longer functioning correctly. That is my hypothesis. I listened to a podcast from Dr. Tim and he said that the interruption of nitrogen cycle is actually quite common and one would/should track nitrites for this reason as any accumulation of the middle product is a sign of malfunction in your tank's balance.

I actually see the opposite on R2R, many report it quickly bottoms out nutrients and they end up with dinos. I saw phosphates go to zero in short order a couple years ago when I used it.

 

[SMSREEF]

Thank you so much for investigating this and writing it up @taricha

I have a question about this portion of initial post.

Perhaps unexpectedly, it does not seem to leave the system (though it would be expected to dissipate from the water).
“Polixetonium chloride is miscible in water [study #’s…] and is not expected to degrade by either abiotic processes [...] or biotic processes [...] Sorption to soil, sediment, and sludge is expected to be the primary route of dissipation, based on the fact that polixetonium chloride is a quaternary ammonium compound that has a positive electrical charge.
A ready biodegradability study […] demonstrated stability to microbial degradation in a WWTP [wastewater treatment plant], which is consistent with the results of other non-WWTP microbial degradation. Therefore, for polixetonium chloride, there is no apparent route of chemical or microbial degradation.”

I clicked on link but don’t get to study you quote. I am googling to find expected half life or how it degrades but can’t find anything.

I have used vibrant (algaefix) for chrysophyte. I needed to redose at the week mark because chrysophyte would start growing again. I wonder if there is a mechanism for breakdown of it in our tanks. Or if possibly my use of ROX carbon removed it from water column.

Thanks again for writing this up.