UWC Reaches Settlement with EPA

[brandon429]

@ingchr1

Should we take down seachem? Their label is a lie.

Does Prime actually "Detoxify" free ammonia, NH3?

All the ammonia ISE instructions I've seen involve the addition of a pH adjuster to raise pH and convert all ammonium to ammonia. In theory, you could skip the pH adjuster and test free/unbound-to-Prime ammonia but I'm not sure it'd actually work. Thanks. I’ve got a few ideas I want to try...

www.reef2reef.com

***truly I want to know how do chemists draw a line between remove business forever due to infraction on label, vs tolerate the product as above.

there's no way this business takedown logic doesn't apply to prime.

Maybe the police can use the angle that due to mislabeling, people might dump out unused bottles and contaminate the ground with vibrant, that's a true risk for mislabeled vibrant

That's why I up voted your post, the EPA has a job to do agreed, we can't lie to them and profit from it, but I want to keep the pile reasonable: nobody can fix valonia tanks now.

That's one of the unstated consequences Matt mentioned.

But bad product/ tank harm?
There's a thousand of these posts:



The reason I advocated for them these years was because the harm rate was low to non existent, much like peroxide. There were enough of those unsolicited independent posts with pics to warrant UWC into the work threader's guild.

I agree the EPA must do it's enforcement. Yall sicc them on seachem then

 

[rtparty]

People need to learn to read and comprehend. Read to understand, not to respond.

UWC didn’t get in trouble because the product didn’t work. That wasn’t even in the scope of the investigation and is never even discussed in the 26 pages.

They got in trouble for advertising and selling a pesticide that wasn’t registered. They also didn’t label it properly therefore they had no warnings about proper use or disposal. If you can’t see the danger in this, well then again read to understand. Dumping chemicals in waterways has consequences. The “ends justifies the means” is a horrible and even evil way to live.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Couldn’t agree more.

Though I will say that it’s a shame that the pharmaceutical companies aren’t held to the same standard.

Oh please. Let's not take this off track or political or it will end up being closed, but that statement shows a total lack of understanding of what is asked of pharma companies for approval and what is legally required to be on the package insert of an approved pharmaceutical, including an exact detailing of what is in the product.

 

[rtparty]

@ingchr1

Should we take down seachem? Their label is a lie.

Does Prime actually "Detoxify" free ammonia, NH3?

All the ammonia ISE instructions I've seen involve the addition of a pH adjuster to raise pH and convert all ammonium to ammonia. In theory, you could skip the pH adjuster and test free/unbound-to-Prime ammonia but I'm not sure it'd actually work. Thanks. I’ve got a few ideas I want to try...

www.reef2reef.com

***truly I want to know how do chemists draw a line between remove business forever due to infraction on label, vs tolerate the product as above.

there's no way this business takedown logic doesn't apply to prime.

Maybe the police can use the angle that due to mislabeling, people might dump out unused bottles and contaminate the ground with vibrant, that's a true risk for mislabeled vibrant

That's why I up voted your post, the EPA has a job to do agreed, we can't lie to them and profit from it, but I want to keep the pile reasonable: nobody can fix valonia tanks now.

That's one of the unstated consequences Matt mentioned.

But bad product/ tank harm? Lemme find some links one sec

The pesticide in Vibrant is literally labeled a molluscicide and its purpose is to kill living organisms found in fresh and saltwater. There were loads of tanks taken out by Vibrant or at least claims by people losing loads of life after dosing it.

BTW - the pesticide in Vibrant is widely available for those wanting to dose it for valonia

Another edit: is Prime being sold as a pesticide? Your logic makes no sense since you don’t even understand the lawsuit to begin with. It wasn’t false advertisement that got UWC in trouble with the EPA

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I don't think what you did was good at all. I give you however 10/10 for engineering that business takedown, epic in fact.

Would you be Ok with a company selling dried cow pies as fiber biscuits for people, telling them they were made from the finest food quality ingredients available?

They would likely work, but are not what they claim.

Constipation fixers would cherish the product.

Scientists would not.

 

[rtparty]

I don't think what you did was good at all. I give you however 10/10 for engineering that business takedown, epic in fact.

UWC took UWC down by breaking the law. lol don’t get it confused that someone else took them down

 

[brandon429]

Do you think prime gets a pass on its lie label Randy? What should be their account?

I hope we don't close the thread it's a valid place to review what businesses deserve to remain or not, and the reasons why. If labels do not state total accuracy on claims, ingredients, I'm curious to see what we use to determine who should stay or go as a business.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Do you think prime gets a pass on its lie label Randy? What should be their account?

You are missing the point.

 

[ingchr1]

...There were loads of tanks taken out by Vibrant or at least claims by people losing loads of life after dosing it...

Based on their operation, I wonder how much inconsistency there may have been in the amount of pesticide in each batch they mixed up.

 

[brandon429]

As I'm reading the inputs, mislabeling by prime isn't cancellable simply because the product if dumped into a river can't contaminate it, it's ingredient isn't a risk like an insecticide is? or is primes lie accepted because it's label is accurate, aside from the imminium salt claims, and due to that labeling a prudent person would know not to contaminate the ground with it?

 

[brandon429]

There are losses listed with any product in reefing

The pattern is the key

Peroxide use has killed some tanks, but it's help rate is so high it'll never leave the reefing toolbox, ever.



Vibrant had a strong positive outcome ratio and a very low loss ratio for the seven years it ran. I knew how to apply it in other people's tanks safely, and we did (after a rip clean where target mass was low we got by on half dosage runs very well)

UWC bears the brunt for the responsibility of insecticide labeling I don't disagree.

Vibrant did things that nobody has a replacement for and that deserves to be included here.
It was not a bad product, or there wouldn't be thousands of positive unsolicited work examples.

I won't overpress it so the thread won't get closed I've said my portion. All disagreements accepted.

The label wasn't a big deal to me because in 24 years of reefing I've never had a job outcome decided based on my inspection of a product label. to this day I'd be using vibrant for valonia jobs if they weren't taken down. The label matters to some, but not me for that reason.


Lots of reefing products lied to me, Marc Weiss products from 2002 were claimed to be reef feed, or just prune juice per Chem forum posts of that day old schoolers will recall. I never once read their label to decide if I would buy it, MW products had zero work thread ability which is why I never used them at all. The labeling did not decide for me

Ten million people buy prime to protect against ammonia, and are cheated out of that cash only helped by the natural tendency of home reef tank pH to trend towards acid vs alkaline, but that doesn't warrant a cancel? That distinction is what I wanted to uncover here.

Seachem also makes some good products... does their prime gaff mean all the good stuff should go away

For sure prime has its exposure threads where readers can discern their own fleecing event, as I'm reading it doesn't deserve cancel since the label is accurate-ish enough to at least cover the high points. If prime lied on the label, why not the same collective push

I think people who all of a sudden care deeply about the EPA just came out of the woodwork, and were not that way in the past and no post history from any reefing site ever shows them as previous epa champions



By the way, I don't think for one second JDA is not sincere in his truth found and consistency in Chem labeling. Long before vibrant was on scene he was verifying claims. He's a chemist, he lives by that accuracy I know. So does Randy, i know they're using innate skill to keep a fair control on sales practices as related to reefing


He did not flip just for UWC downfall and we should make sure we didn't flip either.

I just thought our reefing world isn't that good on labeling anyway and I hated to see a business destroyed for labeling issues when we've never cared about that in the past.

We've = you, me, and all the non chemist posters here acting offended for an epa sleight

Randy and JDA were living that mode long before UWC and vibrant existed they provide an important function agreed.


I bet label makers on reef products will tread more carefully now that gas chromatography is accessible to buyers. And no, I'm not glad vibrant is gone and destroyed I'd have preferred JDA just to invent a better working product tested and proven in forums and simply outcompete UWC in the tank fix market. If it's a bad product, outcompete it.

I know his skill is fact checking, I'm saying I wish it was product innovation instead.

 

[rtparty]

As I'm reading the inputs, mislabeling by prime isn't cancellable simply because the product if dumped into a river can't contaminate it?

Is Prime labeled or advertised as a pesticide?

Please answer this.

 

[Reefer Matt]

Would you be Ok with a company selling dried cow pies as fiber biscuits for people, telling them they were made from the finest food quality ingredients available?

They would likely work, but are not what they claim.

Constipation fixers would cherish the product.

Scientists would not.

 

[Garf]

As I'm reading the inputs, mislabeling by prime isn't cancellable simply because the product if dumped into a river can't contaminate it?

Considering you don't want seachem dropped in it, you are making a darn good effort of dropping seachem in it.

Remember the bit about added bacteria of unknown origin (optional) to aid biodiversity to gut fauna.

 

[rtparty]

Remember the bit about added bacteria of unknown origin (optional) to aid biodiversity to gut fauna.

Definitely use -biotic in the name somewhere. Instant sales.

 

[BeanAnimal]

There are losses listed with any product in reefing

The pattern is the key

Peroxide use has killed some tanks, but it's help rate is so high it'll never leave the reefing toolbox, ever.

You are missing the point of the ruling and the bulk of the conversation. It may help if you read the ruling first.

There pattern that I see... well never mind. Brandin, this is not about "work threads" it is about certain label requirements as they related to certain classes of chemicals.

 

[jda]

Here is a copy of the EPA Registration for Vibrant after they got caught and were forced to file. This is just a registration and certification that they are telling the truth about what is in the product. Why would any person not want this done for something that they put in their tank? This seems a small task for any legit business with a product wanting to help the hobby and community. I have to do more than this every year to keep my professional license (as do many others).

 

[jda]

You are missing the point of the ruling and the bulk of the conversation. It may help if you read the ruling first.

Just let the simple be simple. Their heads might explode when the next parts of this come along in time. Purposeful mislabel of a known pesticide for profit is a serious offense and every example posted in the big Vibrant thread had years of jail time. Consumer fraud is easy to tack on to things like this. Mail fraud was also a part of every linked example - these got shipped. None of us could know this will go specifically with UWC, but tax evasion was also part of the charges in each case. They dig in. A big unknown to me is if the State of MN or the Feds are leading this - either is no joke.

 

[dr_vinnie_boombatz]

Glad I recently stocked up on NeoPhos and NeoNitro

More government involved = higher prices, less product choices

I do agree if products have pesticide ingredients or hazardous this should be well known, I always read available MSDS files for products I use. This is one reason I like Red Sea so much, they're all on the site with each product.

 

[rtparty]

Glad I recently stocked up on NeoPhos and NeoNitro

Why? Are either advertised as a pesticide?

Not to mention homemade solutions are cheap, easy, readily accessible, and you know exactly what is in them