Does anyone do it? Seriously, do they?

[thatmanMIKEson]

I just finished a year with dosing RS colours, ABC and D.

After a year of dosing 3ml each per day as per CA uptake, there has been no noticeable difference in size, extension or coloration in any coral.

If the coral started with great colour, it maintained that same colour and vibrancy.

I have discontinued.

While they fall short of any proof whatsoever, they do suggest that the contents matches those other minor elements found in saltwater, so it must be good…..I guess…or maybe they just got $300 bucks for what’s already in my salt mix….I think.

well that's discouraging I was gunna go down the A,B,C,D road myself...... maybe I'll turn around b4 I go to far

 

[Uncle99]

well that's discouraging I was gunna go down the A,B,C,D road myself...... maybe I'll turn around b4 I go to far

Sorry, I was disappointed.
I’m was not expecting much, but for the price, I should have seen something at least on one or two corals.
Maybe a red, redder, a green, greener….etc….I see nothing after 365 days.
It’s been weeks since I discontinued, and still, everything looks same. In the second pic, these are 2 years old, a year with no coloration program, a year on, look same just bigger now.

 

[taricha]

Counterpoint: Red Sea Trace C (Fe, Mn + others) actually increased some coral coloration for me.....

Finally, one of the claimed reasons that people should dose this Trace element product, is that these elements are beneficial in corals forming green fluorescence. My green corals were looking a little faded, so I figured I'd document, just in case.

The corals definitely look more intensely green to the eye, and the camera captures some of that.

But I was doing a months long thing where I was intentionally depriving my tank of trace elements until the addition of Red Sea Trace parts (one part at a time). Only Part C (Fe, Mn etc) showed anything.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

But I was doing a months long thing where I was intentionally depriving my tank of trace elements until the addition of Red Sea Trace parts (one part at a time). Only Part C (Fe, Mn etc) showed anything.

Did you notice changes during that deprivation stage?

 

[taricha]

Did you notice changes during that deprivation stage?

Mostly that photosynthetic growth slowed. Apparently I also thought that my green hard corals looked "faded" during that deprivation compared to earlier.

 

[JulesH]

One word, Vibrant!

 

[Sisterlimonpot]

@Randy Holmes-Farley on the surface this thread seems pretty straight forward. However, I wonder what the end goal is. I highly doubt we'll see a company chime in defending their reasoning.

I'd imagine, it's more of a reflection for us, the consumers to take a hard look at why we allow companies to make such claims. And why we are gullible enough to believe them.

If so...

Then the question becomes, should we only purchase products that have undeniable proof? And, what does that undeniable proof look like? Do we put our trust in an organization that can provide such proof? Do we have it in us as a collective to designate an entity to make those decisions for us? What would the criteria be?

Here's some food for thought, Would we (as consumers) buy a product from a company that claimed, "we don't have solid evidence that our product does what it claims, but there's enough anecdotal evidence to say it makes a difference"?

Is there a level of honesty in that statement to make someone purchase it? Or is it still a marketing tactic?

 

[Miami Reef]

@Randy Holmes-Farley on the surface this thread seems pretty straight forward. However, I wonder what the end goal is. I highly doubt we'll see a company chime in defending their reasoning.

I'd imagine, it's more of a reflection for us, the consumers to take a hard look at why we allow companies to make such claims. And why we are gullible enough to believe them.

If so...

Then the question becomes, should we only purchase products that have undeniable proof? And, what does that undeniable proof look like? Do we put our trust in an organization that can provide such proof? Do we have it in us as a collective to designate an entity to make those decisions for us? What would the criteria be?

Here's some food for thought, Would we (as consumers) buy a product from a company that claimed, "we don't have solid evidence that our product does what it claims, but there's enough anecdotal evidence to say it makes a difference"?

Is there a level of honesty in that statement to make someone purchase it? Or is it still a marketing tactic?

I think the goal of the OP is twofold: calling out companies that make false claims and informing us reefers not to believe every claim we read/take it with a grain of salt.

 

[taricha]

Then the question becomes, should we only purchase products that have undeniable proof? And, what does that undeniable proof look like? Do we put our trust in an organization that can provide such proof? Do we have it in us as a collective to designate an entity to make those decisions for us? What would the criteria be?

Here's some food for thought, Would we (as consumers) buy a product from a company that claimed, "we don't have solid evidence that our product does what it claims, but there's enough anecdotal evidence to say it makes a difference"?

I like your questions.
I think it's a false choice that we must either accept complete fact-free assertions of nonsense, or else demand incontrovertible proof. Presentation of some supporting data from a company would be a very positive step.

Random thought. I wonder if a small company started selling products with actual supporting data, would that be valuable enough to hobbyists that other companies might feel pressed to follow suit?

 

[jda]

My guess is that such a company would make a product at a higher price point to account for the work and testing, then others will steal it and sell it cheaper since they could skip the R&D. Said company goes out of business.

This is a great line from Jay:

None of these aquarium companies have real labs - they just skim the literature for ideas.

Edit: since Aquarium Systems and Marineland closed their small labs.

 

[Miami Reef]

I think companies giving false information makes more money. People love to buy dreams and magic potions.

For example, seachem 8.3 claims their product will raise the pH to 8.3 and keep it there WITHOUT impacting alkalinity…FALSE!

But LFS owners will make money from desperate people wanting an easy solution.

Or prime. They made so much money from people. Prime was the gold standard for QT and new tanks. It will detoxify ammonia. No harm to filtration etc.

Being honest doesn’t sell as much as selling bottles of magic rainbows that goes against science.

We reefers on the forums are the minority. Many people simply don’t care about the science.

 

[areefer01]

My guess is that such a company would make a product at a higher price point to account for the work and testing, then others will steal it and sell it cheaper since they could skip the R&D. Said company goes out of business.

You mean like ABC reagents or a few 3D printer files.

 

[CoralB]

creating impulse with false claims isn’t new . Not sure how you fix this but until then ,we just do as much research and ask knowledgeable people you trust as many questions as you can mixed with a little common sense and or wait till enough people have tried it to know if it’s right for you . Randy you make a great point but change is hard to implement unless enough people get ticked off and boycott . Been many years since boycott was a thing . Surprised today that beer is the thing that resurrected the practice .

 

[Cichlid Dad]

Unfortunately the only organization large enough to do that, and with a big enough audience, also sells these products so would never be able to provide good research (BRS).

Spot on!

 

[PeterEde]

I'm thinking I'll stop the trace and just maintain Alk, Calc and Mg

 

[PeterEde]

creating impulse with false claims isn’t new . Not sure how you fix this but until then ,we just do as much research and ask knowledgeable people you trust as many questions as you can mixed with a little common sense and or wait till enough people have tried it to know if it’s right for you . Randy you make a great point but change is hard to implement unless enough people get ticked off and boycott . Been many years since boycott was a thing . Surprised today that beer is the thing that resurrected the practice .

Dam that Dylan guy

 

[blaxsun]

I've stopped using a lot of reef supplements. Specifically, Red Sea Reef Energy AB+. Four months or so on and I've noticed absolutely no difference - except more room in my mini fridge.

 

[Amphibious Wallet]

If there are fools to buy it.. let it be!

Agree about the fool and their wallet, but on the flip side of said coin it could be seen as damaging to advancement of the hobby if noone can be trusted.
That said, hell yes I'll enable the behaviour by buying their barely-used 2nd hand hardware as the hobby loses a member. The dichotomy, eh?

 

[blaxsun]

Agree about the fool and their wallet, but on the flip side of said coin it could be seen as damaging to advancement of the hobby if noone can be trusted.

After the last year, can you honestly say any manufacturer can really be trusted at this point?

 

[Borat]

After the last year, can you honestly say any manufacturer can really be trusted at this point?

What was special about last year?