Are really stringy white poops a sign of internal parasites or is it a myth?

[HotRocks]

My point is - never ever be sure on anythin

Likewise my friend

 

[MnFish1]

Sorry, but these two quotes are nowhere near the same thing. The first you were very clear, nothing prescribed unless there is a documented illness. The second indicates she’d be totally fine writing scrips for people she knows without any illness and generally OK treating some diseases prophylactically. If what she said was the second quote, then the first quote is a clear misrepresentation of what she actually said.

fwiw - you're wrong - and youre wrong about what I said - and you're wrong about where things are going - and youre (IMHO) just incorrect in general. You should at least acknowledge whats going on in Canada. Its an issue right? I know you will say TTM - which will work against CI - and perhaps velvet. But Brook? Uronema? etc - come on? IMHO you're burying your head in the sand..... And I'm not an immune tank fanatic (no offense @Lasse @PaulB. ). Treating 'stringy white poop' (great scientific definition) as a disease - the question from the OP was 'is it'?

 

[Tony Thompson]

Im in the UK which is still unfortunately part of Europe as we speak! I just think its a bit wrong of some people to try to change what people are doing based on their own beliefs instead of keeping it to themselves and let people make their own decisions as i am sure most people do anyhow

Hi @Lizfrank1234 , I think @Lasse article is an important one within the discussion of medication of our animals. IMO an excellent write up by Lasse. I don't see how any of his comments could be construed as trying to change what people are doing. The way I read his comments, his direction was more of an awareness of the implications of using medicines without due diligence. Attempting an informed and calculated diagnosis before prescribing medication is just good practice.

I am of course aware that as hobbyists we sometimes have limited knowledge or accurate equipment to make these informed decisions, but all the same as Lasse has pointed out we also need to be aware of any negative side effects these drugs may have, especially if wrongly prescribed or inaccurately dosed.

My own quarantine procedures are not written in stone, each animal gets individual treatment depending on condition and species. I am also a great advocate of Quarantining all animals that are to enter your main aquarium. However I primarily use this QT period to observe and condition my animals, using a very targeted diet, minimum six weeks, normally around 8 weeks.

With regards your statement re: `Europe`, unless I am mistaken and there has been a major new discovery of the distribution of the tectonic plates, specifically the Euroasion plate, I think you will find The British Isles will always be part of Europe. The European Union on the other hand is another topic all together

Happy Reefing from a fellow UK Reefer.

 

[HotRocks]

Hey @Lasse

Can you review this thread when you get a chance?

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/black-storm-qt-trouble-need-help-asap.611132/#post-6150999

I'm curious as to what your opinion is? I think this is a good example of a fish that had stopped eating and was displaying symptoms of internal parasites. Then had a positive reaction to the medication. It made me think of this thread this am when she posted the update .

 

[BestMomEver]

My observation.... beware as this is gross... based on what a person eats (same for a dog, cat, horse, bird, pig, etc), the color, consistency, smell and quantity of poop changes. The variety of diet changes and the digestive process accommodates the change. The same can probably be said for fish. We are offering food to our fish that likely doesn’t resemble the wild foods that fish eat in the ocean. Their bodies respond by accommodating the new diet. Often when a new fish arrives, they are fed a different diet resulting in different poop. Example... I have three blue chromis that have been in my tank for a year or better with no problem. Recently, I bought a new food. For a few days following their first meal of the new food, they had white stringy poop. After that first few days, I saw no more stringy poop and have not seen it since.

I believe we are often too eager to snatch our fish out of their home, toss them into a barren QT and toss in some meds. That, alone, would stress a fish. Personally, I would need to observe other symptoms before I started treatment.

 

[Lasse]

Hey @Lasse

Can you review this thread when you get a chance?

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/black-storm-qt-trouble-need-help-asap.611132/#post-6150999

I'm curious as to what your opinion is? I think this is a good example of a fish that had stopped eating and was displaying symptoms of internal parasites. Then had a positive reaction to the medication. It made me think of this thread this am when she posted the update .

I answer in this thread.

I was first to say that it had at least 3 indication of a diplomonad infection but after that I look at the timescale I have changed my mind. It starts to eat more or less the same day as the General Cure (that´s I have learn including metro) was administrated (22 hours if I read the timestamps right) and after it was moved from the copper treatment. I have reports of using metro against diplomonad infections (myself, my friend and many fellow aquarists in the Swedish Cichlid association) from thousands of Cichlids. They report are all the same - it will take at least 3 - 4 days before they start to eat after a diplomonad infection. This seems for me like the behaviour of the fish was an answer from the fish to the copper treatment – and when the fish come into fresh saltwater – it starts to eat. A metro bath does not have as fast effect IMO

Sincerely Lasse

 

[mcarroll]

I don't think most of us have a firm grip on the information in this article: (I know I did not)

Role of mucus layers in gut infection and inflammation

I'm no vet but it sounds like white stringy poops could simply be nothing more than an empty bowel trying to work... shedding its mucus layer in the process.

I would suggest that anyone facing stringy white poops who is feeling more eager than "doing nothing/waiting" should perhaps take samples and look at them under a microscope as a first logical step. Proceed from there.

It would certainly be interesting to see a catalog slowly build up of folks taking photos of stringy white poops under microscope's to see the actual results of positives and negatives where parasites are and are not identified. (More interesting than speculation about it anyway.)

I've not heard any of the thread's detractors encourage anything like that. Instead they seem to encourage what amounts to "shoot first ask questions later" bravado with pharmaceuticals.

The suggested prophylactic uses of pharmaceuticals on fish in this thread, for example, have been compared with prophylactic application of heartworm medication in dogs.

These two uses of prophylactic medicine are not in the same category of science. Not even close.

One important difference is that science can change its mind. Check out this document on heartworms to see the history of that disease and where things are currently going with it: https://www.aaha.org/graphics/origi...ces/other resources/ceva_heartwormbooklet.pdf

Lots of good science going on there.

@Lasse correct me if necessary, but I think this may at least in part have been the point of this thread:
Is there any science at all behind "white stringy poops " as they are known in our hobby?

At least this far into the thread the answer appears to be no.

We have no idea at all what organism we're targeting, or even if there is one at all.

 

[MnFish1]

The suggested prophylactic uses of pharmaceuticals on fish in this thread, for example, have been compared with prophylactic application of heartworm medication in dogs.

These two uses of prophylactic medicine are not in the same category of science. Not even close.

Agree with this - I did mention heart worm - I hope my post did not suggest that they are even similar (heart worm prophylaxis vs. empiric treatment of a symptom). My point about heartworm is that veterinarians (for scientific reasons) are likely to be much more willing to give heart worm prophylaxis than they are an antibiotic (metronidazole) - for treating a symptom.

Much in the way that human doctors do not give antibiotics anymore when you go to the doctor with a cough. The use of antibiotics without proven infection is being severely limited in human medicine as well. BTW - Im not people are aware - but slowly but surely national guidelines for the use of various medications (including antibiotics) in human and veterinary medicine are being drawn up. I can easily envision a day where a doctor is reported to a state veterinary board for prescribing medications without 'seeing the patient', for example.

 

[Lasse]

I don't think most of us have a firm grip on the information in this article: (I know I did not)

Role of mucus layers in gut infection and inflammation

I'm no vet but it sounds like white stringy poops could simply be nothing more than an empty bowel trying to work... shedding its mucus layer in the process.

Yes - it is rather fun to see that science have the same standpoint 2013 as the vets from the Swedish Fish health authorities had back in 1977 when we worked together with the Diplomonad infection of African Cichlids.

I would suggest that anyone facing stringy white poops who is feeling more eager than "doing nothing/waiting" should perhaps take samples and look at them under a microscope as a first logical step. Proceed from there.

The problem with this is that this type of flagellate probably always will be present in the gut of our fishes (and in the water) You will always see them but – during normal conditions – they do not cause any disease. Stress, lowering of the immune system, wrong food, bad water conditions and much more can cause an imbalance and they become a monoculture in the intestines. In Lake Tanganyika - there is fishes that get this disease rather fast and often – but there is also species that never ever get it – even if there is an outbreak in the tank. The things that differ the species is their food preferences. Algae eaters (with longer digestive track) gets this disease if they get to heavy food. They work best with pure algae. Carnivores and omnivore Lake Tanganyika fish never get the disease. If I would expect this type of disease in SW fish it should be with tangs and other herbivores. But as I have said before – normal coloured and not shy fish that eat with tiny white poop is not an indication of a diplomonad infection. At least two indications is needed

It would certainly be interesting to see a catalog slowly build up of folks taking photos of stringy white poops under microscope's to see the actual results of positives and negatives where parasites are and are not identified. (More interesting than speculation about it anyway.)

I've not heard any of the thread's detractors encourage anything like that. Instead they seem to encourage what amounts to "shoot first ask questions later" bravado with pharmaceuticals.

The suggested prophylactic uses of pharmaceuticals on fish in this thread, for example, have been compared with prophylactic application of heartworm medication in dogs.

These two uses of prophylactic medicine are not in the same category of science. Not even close.

One important difference is that science can change its mind. Check out this document on heartworms to see the history of that disease and where things are currently going with it: https://www.aaha.org/graphics/original/professional/resources/other resources/ceva_heartwormbooklet.pdf

Yes - things changes - but I have not seen anything that have change my opinion about white stringy poop

Lots of good science going on there.

Thanks

@Lasse correct me if necessary, but I think this may at least in part have been the point of this thread:

Is there any science at all behind "white stringy poops " as they are known in our hobby?

At least this far into the thread the answer appears to be no.

We have no idea at all what organism we're targeting, or even if there is one at all.

According to some articles (scientific) about diplomonad it is mentioned the stringy white poop as a reaction on the disease – the way your cited article describes the mucus layer function against invaders. But it is always mentioned together with other indications. You can find the references in some of my and other posts in this thread

I have not seen any article (scientific) about other internal parasite (or worms) causing this type of white stringy poops among fishes. Would love to see it - if it exists any. And I do not mean hobby articles

I do not think that you can role out diplomonad infections among our reef fishes – it can exist, but I think that you can role out that only a white stringy poop is a prove of internal parasites – even diplomonads. It is needed at least one more indication – as not eating for an example.

I had taken metro more than once in my life (it means that it has been critical for my surviving more than once) and the only thing I can say is that use this drug to fishes when not needed for surviving is rather cruel against the fish - and have nothing with good husbandry to do. On the other hand – to use it when you have more indications of a diplomonad infection than only a thin stringy poop can be good.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

Hey @Lasse

Can you review this thread when you get a chance?

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/black-storm-qt-trouble-need-help-asap.611132/#post-6150999

I'm curious as to what your opinion is? I think this is a good example of a fish that had stopped eating and was displaying symptoms of internal parasites. Then had a positive reaction to the medication. It made me think of this thread this am when she posted the update .

Im not @Lasse - but - doesnt it come down to this: what is the sensitivity and specificity of 'stringy white poop' in making a diagnosis? The same with any other 'diagnostic test'... In this case is observing 'stringy white poop'.

My guess - sometimes (no clue as to how often) this signifies a pathogen. My guess is (again no clue as to how often) this signifies a pathogen that will kill the fish. Other times this is normal

The question - what is the risk of treating a fish with no disease and stringy poop (a false positive) vs the risk of not treating a fish with active disease and stringy poop (true positive) vs not treating a fish with 'normal poop' that actually has disease (a false negative) vs empirically treating every fish (i.e. normal poop with no disease)?

The problem - no one knows these numbers - so we can debate back and forth and back and forth - and it all comes down to prophylactic treatment vs active treatment of disease... IMHO - personally - stringy white poop can happen without any disease present - and thus should not be a key marker of deciding when or not to treat a fish...

 

[HotRocks]

Im not @Lasse - but - doesnt it come down to this: what is the sensitivity and specificity of 'stringy white poop' in making a diagnosis? The same with any other 'diagnostic test'... In this case is observing 'stringy white poop'.

My guess - sometimes (no clue as to how often) this signifies a pathogen. My guess is (again no clue as to how often) this signifies a pathogen that will kill the fish. Other times this is normal

The question - what is the risk of treating a fish with no disease and stringy poop (a false positive) vs the risk of not treating a fish with active disease and stringy poop (true positive) vs not treating a fish with 'normal poop' that actually has disease (a false negative) vs empirically treating every fish (i.e. normal poop with no disease)?

The problem - no one knows these numbers - so we can debate back and forth and back and forth - and it all comes down to prophylactic treatment vs active treatment of disease... IMHO - personally - stringy white poop can happen without any disease present - and thus should not be a key marker of deciding when or not to treat a fish...

For the sake of the discussion do we really know how bad metronidazole is for the fish?

I can tell you I have never had white stringy poop that was put under a scope that didn't have parasites present. So for me that is a no brainier to treat white stringy poop with med soaked food.

How much risk is really involved with using metro?

How much risk is involved "waiting it out"? Not medicating. I know it's not realistic for most hobbyists to take a sample of fecal matter put it on a slide and under a microscope. Although good enough microscopes to do so aren't all that expensive in relation to everything else we buy in this hobby.

I'm just not sold that waiting makes any more sense than medicating. I can't wrap my head around it. Not to mention a fish that has white stringy poop that is still eating, can easily be medicated. It's been mentioned in this thread to wait until another symptom like a pinched stomach or a fish stopped eating as a second signal of internal parasites.

At the point the fish stops eating IME it's near impossible to bring them back from that. Plus you can't get the meds to the gut where you need them to be effective.

 

[MnFish1]

For the sake of the discussion do we really know how bad metronidazole is for the fish?

I can tell you I have never had white stringy poop that was put under a scope that didn't have parasites present. So for me that is a no brainier to treat white stringy poop with med soaked food.

How much risk is really involved with using metro?

How much risk is involved "waiting it out"? Not medicating. I know it's not realistic for most hobbyists to take a sample of fecal matter put it on a slide and under a microscope. Although good enough microscopes to do so aren't all that expensive in relation to everything else we buy in this hobby.

I'm just not sold that waiting makes any more sense than medicating. I can't wrap my head around it. Not to mention a fish that has white stringy poop that is still eating, can easily be medicated. It's been mentioned in this thread to wait until another symptom like a pinched stomach or a fish stopped eating as a second signal of internal parasites.

At the point the fish stops eating IME it's near impossible to bring them back from that. Plus you can't get the meds to the gut where you need them to be effective.

Firstly - there are other options than metronidazole (fembendazole for example as a bath - or metronidazole as a bath)
Second - I agree completely - its unknown. @Lasse thinks that treating with Metronidazole has long term risks - I dont know if this is the case.
Third. to me the key question relates to how often do fish have 'white stringy poop' actually have a disease that needs to be treated... IMHO - there needs to be something more than just that - only because - I have seen it intermittently in fish in my tank that have not been exposed to any5ing.... Realize - its just my opinion. Frankly - I always like it when you join the conversation - because of your experience.... That is also not just blowing sunshine up your skirt (is that appropriate for this forum)? rather your experience

 

[Lasse]

At the point the fish stops eating IME it's near impossible to bring them back from that. Plus you can't get the meds to the gut where you need them to be effective.

This is not true -at all - FW fish is treated against this diplomonad infections with the drug in the water. It reach the stomach (and the whole body) because these drugs is fat soluble - it means that they will seek themselves to the part in the environment which contain most fat - it penetrate into the fish from the water and bioaccumulate and bioconcentrate in the fish up to therapeutic concentrations and beyond - if no WC is done. I have brought back many, many FW fish from this disease without that they have eat. Further on because these drugs are fat soluble – they are very difficult for fish to breakdown and get rid of especially for SW fish because they nearly not pee (the normal transport pathway for these types of compounds – after they have been hydrolysed). The breakdown take place in a system that is named MFO and P-450. In this process – metabolites will be formed – some very nasty and some not so nasty. You never know with these drugs the exact breakdown process because it demands about genes, earlier history of fat-soluble compounds that have gone through these systems. It also depends on other drugs that is in use like QP and Prazi. All of these will bioaccumulate in the fish and there is reasons why nearly all of the drugs that are in use in the ornamental fish treatment in the US is banned for treatment of fish that should be eaten. It is not even an quarantine period (as it is with some water soluble antibiotics) – it is total forbidden because of the bioaccumulation. It is the same with copper – it will bioaccumulate and all of these drugs will be bioconcentrated.

It is not harmless drugs that you are playing around with and to use them if they are not needed - is not a wise way of handling it

I can tell you I have never had white stringy poop that was put under a scope that didn't have parasites present.

That´s not so strange because these flagellates is a part of the normal flora in the gut - you can se them i a drop of water too. You can see a lot of anaerobic bacteria too - that also can be dangerous for the fish - but normally is good for the fish.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MabuyaQ]

Digestion is a funny proces. In most animals (including humans) it is not really efficient because they can always get access to a new meal with limited effort/danger so they basically strip the food the eat only from the nutrients easily accessible). Most of those animals also have an active digestive tract (where muscle movement/peristaltic movenent moves food relatively fast through the digestive tract). The corn goes in and corn comes out kind of digestion no matter how much you eat and how long it has been since you had your last meal before you ate corn.

Fish are animals that seem to have had to evolve a different strategy because access to a new meal isn't as reliable/predictable for them. They use displacement presure (new food pushing old food backwards) and much slower than peristaltic movement ciliate movement to transport food in the digestive tract. Their strategy is to keep food as long as possible in the digestive tract to extract the maximum amount of nutrients unless there is already new food available. This means for fish the amount of time food can and will stay in the digestive tract is far more variable and this time effect also has an effect on what the end results looks like.

Most of my fish get white stringy poop from time to time simply because periodically I feed them much less than both in quantity and frequency sometimes even nothing at all. Liver fattening resulting from unnaturial overfeeding and the health issues related to it are seen in a lot in pets including fish.

 

[Lasse]

Digestion is a funny proces. In most animals (including humans) it is not really efficient because they can always get access to a new meal with limited effort/danger so they basically strip the food the eat only from the nutrients easily accessible). Most of those animals also have an active digestive tract (where muscle movement/peristaltic movenent moves food relatively fast through the digestive tract). The corn goes in and corn comes out kind of digestion no matter how much you eat and how long it has been since you had your last meal before you ate corn.

Fish are animals that seem to have had to evolve a different strategy because access to a new meal isn't as reliable/predictable for them. They use displacement presure (new food pushing old food backwards) and much slower than peristaltic movement ciliate movement to transport food in the digestive tract. Their strategy is to keep food as long as possible in the digestive tract to extract the maximum amount of nutrients unless there is already new food available. This means for fish the amount of time food can and will stay in the digestive tract is far more variable and this time effect also has an effect on what the end results looks like.

Most of my fish get white stringy poop from time to time simply because periodically I feed them much less than both in quantity and frequency sometimes even nothing at all. Liver fattening resulting from unnaturial overfeeding and the health issues related to it are seen in a lot in pets including fish.

Exactly - thank you for this. With one exeption known for me - there can be more - the normal for most fish is eat and poop. The exeption that I know of is the Anguilla genus. They have a stomach above the intenstine - they can´t eat (no place in the stomach) if the instenine is full. Eat - wait - poop and when eat is normal for them.

For the moment I do not feed my fish (havent for three years) with dry food of any sort. Only frozen artemia, cyclops and mysis. feeds once a day. I keep many "keep long time difficult fish", like pipefish. some of them can be seen here

Sincerely Lasse

 

[HotRocks]

This is not true -at all - FW fish is treated against this diplomonad infections with the drug in the water. It reach the stomach (and the whole body) because these drugs is fat soluble - it means that they will seek themselves to the part in the environment which contain most fat - it penetrate into the fish from the water and bioaccumulate and bioconcentrate in the fish up to therapeutic concentrations and beyond - if no WC is done. I have brought back many, many FW fish from this disease without that they have eat. Further on because these drugs are fat soluble – they are very difficult for fish to breakdown and get rid of especially for SW fish because they nearly not pee (the normal transport pathway for these types of compounds – after they have been hydrolysed).

My friend, it's very true. Out of the several hundred fish I have handled if it had white stringy poop, was eating when symptoms arose and then stopped. They didn't start back up again. I don't know what else you want me to say, I just speak from my personal experience, just like you do. I can't speak from experience on freshwater fish as it's been over 30 years since I've had a FW fish.

Lasse. You know what might be helpful. If you take the time to do a write up on all of your acclimation procedures and tank practices. That way a member that wants to do what you do has all the info in fine detail. I feel like you guys who don't QT are always really quick to criticize all of us who do treat prophylactically etc. Yet I never see any detailed write ups directing the membership how to "do what you do". I mean that with sincerity. Not sarcasm. I have spent a lot of time and money trying to figure out the best way to beat this disaster of a distribution system we have here in the US. Just two weeks ago I helped a LFS convert his system to run therapuetic copper. He's experienced only 10% loss when he was at 50% which is a darn shame. It's for the betterment of our hobby. I can tell you it's a nice rewarding feeling when you get PMs or see members mention your QT write up and how much it's increased their success rate with new fish. If your so sure what you do works over here why not share it with others?

I'm the first to admit my system isn't perfect either and I have had my fair share of struggles. I am always transparent and share the good with the bad.

 

[HotRocks]

Firstly - there are other options than metronidazole (fembendazole for example as a bath - or metronidazole as a bath)
Second - I agree completely - its unknown. @Lasse thinks that treating with Metronidazole has long term risks - I dont know if this is the case.
Third. to me the key question relates to how often do fish have 'white stringy poop' actually have a disease that needs to be treated... IMHO - there needs to be something more than just that - only because - I have seen it intermittently in fish in my tank that have not been exposed to any5ing.... Realize - its just my opinion. Frankly - I always like it when you join the conversation - because of your experience.... That is also not just blowing sunshine up your skirt (is that appropriate for this forum)? rather your experience

If I wore a skirt we'd all be in trouble!

On the baths...

They just aren't nearly as effective. Don't get wrong, it's definitely better than nothing IMO and there is still a chance it works. Using pharmaceutical grade medication symptoms are usually gone within 3-5 days. I still feed the meds for 10-14.

 

[DSC reef]

I don't criticize anyone who has a QT and I don't QT, never have. I know there are many practices and ways to have a successful reef tank and thriving fish. However I will criticize those who quarintine that give endless amounts of grief to those who don't and blame everything that has gone wrong in their tank is due to not having a quarintine. I've read plenty of threads where the "QT" clan can criticize just as much. Sorry I don't have any write ups but all I can do is share my experiences as that's what I believe this forum is about, coming together and helping eachother and giving different ideas as pathways to success. I think both sides have a lot to offer IMO

 

[MnFish1]

I feel like you guys who don't QT are always really quick to criticize all of us who do treat prophylactically etc.

@HotRocks. maybe an Hawaiian skirt? JK - its a family site... If you look at the boards - this works both ways. Those that use a lot of chemicals said the ones that don't are 'cruel'. Those that don't use chemicals say the ones that do are cruel. Its all a back and forth.

My perspective - as I think many people who you lump into the group of 'don't QT' - is that treatment when there is a disease is warranted - but not prophylactically. Perhaps im in the minority - but I don't think so.

Read this as 'constructive criticism'. You and others have designed a protocol - to try to skirt biology - using 2 weeks of copper at xxx level and then an observation for 2 weeks. Its widely published here. Does it work? I dont know... Is it bad? I dont know. Is is good? same I dont know. Nor do you guys - you are playing the odds - so are those that dont QT. Most aquaria say observation QT should be longer than 30 days. Most articles on treating velvet and CI say longer than you recommend... Who is right? The answer - IMHO - whoever has their fish come out of whatever they do alive - eating - and non-contagious. No one is criticizing you guys. But - realize that your protocol is not mainstream, proven or documented - and has failed at least once (sorry). And BTW you do share your good and bad experiences.. Thanks for all you do. ON average - my feeling is that at least observation QT IS AN EXTREME ADVANTAGE - with treatment as needed

 

[HotRocks]

I don't criticize anyone who has a QT and I don't QT, never have. I know there are many practices and ways to have a successful reef tank and thriving fish. However I will criticize those who quarintine that give endless amounts of grief to those who don't and blame everything that has gone wrong in their tank is due to not having a quarintine. I've read plenty of threads where the "QT" clan can criticize just as much. Sorry I don't have any write ups but all I can do is share my experiences as that's what I believe this forum is about, coming together and helping eachother and giving different ideas as pathways to success. I think both sides have a lot to offer IMO

It certainly goes both ways. I get it.

My point is - we don't have a sticky that says... If you want to do this without QT here is what you need to Do etc, here is the type of equipment that is beneficial, etc.

I agree with you @MnFish1. Observe and treat is very valuable. I used to only run copper for 30 days and then observe for another 2 weeks to 30 days and I was still losing many fish. Of course it was before the Hanna checker for copper days etc. I also used to run into bacterial infections alot during the copper treatment usually in the last two weeks. That is why we adapted the method we use.

Btw - I have had four successful tanks of 14 days of copper at the 2.0-2.25 range since the "fail".

If you can get away with not QTing all the more power to you! It didn't work for me at all. I don't like medicating fish at all. I just don't know what other option there is when you see the things I see. I also understand that the volume of fish I treat is much higher (since I treat alot of fish for friends and other locals). The more fish you handle the higher the risk is that one shows up with something unwanted... So there's that.