How do I frag zoas without killing myself?

[Tavero]

Not really - who/what is going to positively identify and quantify the palytoxin danger with certainty?? I wouldn't trust you or anybody else, given the lack of real research on the topic.

And still, for any other poisonous pet it would be insane not to identify the animal and approximate the amount of poison and danger that the owner is dealing with. No spider owner would handle a tarantula and a sand spider the same even if he caught then himself and didn't know the exact scientific name.
And real research is lacking there too.

Just the odor of them if disturbed in my tank makes me sick. I have attempted to remove them several times, but just a few cells and they grow back. Nasty stuff.

Exacly. That's why I wrote semi useful advice. Because in this case, even the most careful advice the commenters gave OP, wouldn't have been enough. But there is a chance for palytoxin to be present in normal corals too. We don't use hazmat suits to frag them though, right?

Safety gear gives a wrong sense of security and a bit of knowledge and common sense is much more useful.

 

[BeanAnimal]

And still, for any other poisonous pet it would be insane not to identify the animal and approximate the amount of poison and danger that the owner is dealing with.

The issue here is lack of any reliable identification information coupled with what we do know about the poison and the fact that there are many documented case of poisoning. Therefore one must assume the worst.

But there is a chance for palytoxin to be present in normal corals too. We don't use hazmat suits to frag them though, right?

That is a rather obtuse and hyperbolic stretch, so no.

Safety gear gives a wrong sense of security and a bit of knowledge and common sense is much more useful.

That is insanely silly and even more of a stretch. Knowledge is not a replacement for PPE by any stretch of the imagination. The fact that you would argue as much to support your position means that this conversation is over.

 

[Tavero]

The issue here is lack of any reliable identification information coupled with what we do know about the poison and the fact that there are many documented case of poisoning. Therefore one must assume the worst.


That is a rather obtuse and hyperbolic stretch, so no.


That is insanely silly and even more of a stretch. Knowledge is not a replacement for PPE by any stretch of the imagination. The fact that you would argue as much to support your position means that this conversation is over.

You totally missed my point. I didn't argued against PPE. That's your conclusion. I wrote that without knowledge it won't protect you adequately and give a wrong sense of security. No amount of PPE will save you if you scratch your face with dirty gloves. If you want to stop this conversation because you disagree, fine by me but that shows a lot more about yourself than the topic itself.

People that trust their safety gear get complacent and work differently than without it, when they expect it to protect them. That's a fact. If we have to assume the worst and want to be safe, we can't put our hands into our tanks anymore. There are a lot more dangerous things inside our tanks than palytoxin. Giving OP anxiety for fragging something similar to OG Watermelons is IMHO not helpful.

 

[vetteguy53081]

Wear gloves. keep them submersed or wet and have good ventilation. Not as dangerous as they are cut out to be. Careful handling and keep your hands away from your eyes is helpful

 

[BeanAnimal]

You totally missed my point. I didn't argued against PPE.

I did not miss your point, you obfuscated it (and continue to do so) yourself with your own comments trying to support your opinion. You are, with all due respect arguing yourself into a circle.

I wrote that without knowledge it won't protect you adequately and give a wrong sense of security. No amount of PPE will save you if you scratch your face with dirty gloves.

You are still being obtuse to be right. Proper use of PPE would dictate that one does not touch their face with contaminated gloves, be it in an aquarium or a lab or a sewage treatment plant. That has nothing to do with the fact that we can't reliably determine with paly's or zoa's are dangerous or deadly.

If you want to stop this conversation because you disagree, fine by me but that shows a lot more about yourself than the topic itself.

The context was that (respectfully) I can see where this is headed. You have already drifted from my initial response. That response was to treat all paly and zoa as deadly because we don't have trustworthy information to identify which are safe or not.

You tangentially arguing that knowledge is better than safety equipment and knowing the risks is important. But that is MY POINT - we KNOW THE RISKS so we MUST take the proper precautions and that primary precaution is PPE. Proper use if PPE is an understood component of that response, no matter how many "what if" scenarios you throw at it.

People that trust their safety gear get complacent and work differently than without it,

That is tangent to the fact that it is needed in the first place. As mentioned above, you are drifting from the point.
To be clear that point:

1) Understand that there the zoas and paly pose a significant risk, therefore wear PPE.

2) If using PPE, follow the procedures for donning and disposing of said PPE. That is a given.

That's a fact. If we have to assume the worst and want to be safe, we can't put our hands into our tanks anymore.

You are being obtuse again. This has nothing to do with ANY OTHER disease, bacteria ore risk involved in aquaria. We are talking about the handling of paly's and zoa's PERIOD.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Wear gloves. keep them submersed or wet and have good ventilation. Not as dangerous as they are cut out to be. Careful handling and keep your hands away from your eyes is helpful

Ohh I think they far more dangerous than they are cut out to be. If you actually go collect the different threads and stories from various forums there are numerous first hand accounts and these are only what are searchable or people were willing to post. That and how many cases are not documented simply because the victim did not know that their sickness or injury came from palytoxin poisoning?

If throwing caution to the wind, I would say that goggles (not glasses) would be as important as the gloves. This is due to the "squirting" factor and at least two instances I know of that resulted in permanent blindness and a one family dead dog.

 

[Reefering1]

Wear gloves. keep them submersed or wet and have good ventilation. Not as dangerous as they are cut out to be. Careful handling and keep your hands away from your eyes is helpful

And don't eat them... got it!

 

[Tavero]

I did not miss your point, you obfuscated it (and continue to do so) yourself with your own comments trying to support your opinion. You are, with all due respect arguing yourself into a circle.

You are still being obtuse to be right. Proper use of PPE would dictate that one does not touch their face with contaminated gloves, be it in an aquarium or a lab or a sewage treatment plant. That has nothing to do with the fact that we can't reliably determine with paly's or zoa's are dangerous or deadly.

Ohh is it? Then you haven't worked in that industry because I've seen uncountable cases of trained and untrained personnel with gloves touching their face, wiping their forehead ect. This happens unconsciously and that's why I still think proper working discipline is important and was worth mentioning.

My initial answer was, that by using gloves and common sense, OP will be fine with these zoanthids and I personally would handle them the same. So you writing that I obfuscate my points and argue in circles is a bit rude IMHO, when I never deviated or changed from this opinion and the arguments.

That response was to treat all paly and zoa as deadly because we don't have trustworthy information to identify which are safe or not.

That's your opinion and while you're entitled to have one, I disagree with it.
In all cases of poisoning I have come across during the last 20 or so years, it's always the same culprits: Palythoa Grandis, palythoa nuclear green and all the other palythoas with that iconic palythoa form. I don't know of any poisoning case handling zoanthus. So when you said, in caps, that we know the risk, I agree with you. But that risk can be considered low by observing the official cases while handling iconic zoanthus.

Second, palytoxin is highly potent, heat resistant and can be aerosolized. If you want to be careful about Zoanthids and always consider the worst, that's fine but then you should be honest and tell others to to avoid them entirely. Everything else isn't 100% safe and in my opinion a bit hypocritical.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Ohh is it? Then you haven't worked in that industry because I've seen uncountable cases of trained and untrained personnel with gloves touching their face,

You are continuing to wander far from my initial response.

My initial answer was, that by using gloves and common sense, OP will be fine with these zoanthids and I personally would handle them the same.

And yet you have rambled for 3 or 4 posts about how people misuse gloves and other protective gear to achieve a false sense of security. You are quite literally arguing against your own point.

So you writing that I obfuscate my points and argue in circles is a bit rude IMHO, when I never deviated or changed from this opinion and the arguments.

it is not rude. You intimated that my desire to not further the conversation with you was due to some personality or intelligence flaw on my end. I responded to you indicating that I did not wish to further the conversation because you were already headed down tangential paths and drifting from my comments, and to this moment continue to do so.

In all cases of poisoning I have come across during the last 20 or so years, it's always the same culprits: Palythoa Grandis, palythoa nuclear green and all the other palythoas with that iconic palythoa form. I don't know of any poisoning case handling zoanthus. So when you said in caps that we know the risk I agree with you. But that risk can be considered low by observing the official cases.

And I said, that I don't trust your observations as factual, nor those of anybody else and prefer to err on the side of safety given what we do know about palytoxin and how hard it is to identify which paly/zoa contain it. The advice would be different of there were some definitive reference resource and means of reliable identification of one's tank contents to match that reference.

Second, palytoxin is highly potent, heat resistant and can be aerosolized. If you want to be careful about Zoanthids and always consider the worst, that's fine but then you should be honest and tell others to to avoid them entirely. Everything else isn't 100% safe and in my opinion a bit hypocritical.

Not only have you argued against your own point, but you are now attempting to obtusely turn my point around and call me hypocritical for telling people to treat all paly/zoa as dangerous. This has become beyond silly.

Have a wonderful Easter and happy reefing, this conversation has run its course.

 

[Tavero]

You are continuing to wander far from my initial response.


And yet you have rambled for 3 or 4 posts about how people misuse gloves and other protective gear to achieve a false sense of security. You are quite literally arguing against your own point.


it is not rude. You intimated that my desire to not further the conversation with you was due to some personality or intelligence flaw on my end. I responded to you indicating that I did not wish to further the conversation because you were already headed down tangential paths and drifting from my comments, and to this moment continue to do so.


And I said, that I don't trust your observations as factual, nor those of anybody else and prefer to err on the side of safety given what we do know about palytoxin and how hard it is to identify which paly/zoa contain it. The advice would be different of there were some definitive reference resource and means of reliable identification of one's tank contents to match that reference.


Not only have you argued against your own point, but you are now attempting to obtusely turn my point around and call me hypocritical for telling people to treat all paly/zoa as dangerous. This has become beyond silly.

Have a wonderful Easter and happy reefing, this conversation has run its course.

Thanks.
I had nice a Easter vacation. I hope you did too.

I tried to make my points clearer by using examples of other disciplines to reinforce my arguments but it seems like we continue to argue past each other. Let's just say we agree to disagree in our opinions about the dangers of zoanthids.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Thanks.
I had nice a Easter vacation. I hope you did too.

I tried to make my points clearer by using examples of other disciplines to reinforce my arguments but it seems like we continue to argue past each other. Let's just say we agree to disagree in our opinions about the dangers of zoanthids.

We are not talking past each other, you lost context and argued against your own point. You are absolutely free to agree or disagree with whatever you wish and handle coral in any way that you wish.

The science tells us that lineages of both palythoa and zoanthid have the ability to produce the toxin. Science also tells us that due to the plasticity of their evolution and the vast number of siblings distributed globally, that we can't tell by looks alone which specific lineages are carry the toxin.

You are fine playing "Russian Roulette" but you misunderstand the odds. Your prerogative, but misleading others as to the safety is the issue.

 

[Tavero]

We are not talking past each other, you lost context and argued against your own point. You are absolutely free to agree or disagree with whatever you wish and handle coral in any way that you wish.

The science tells us that lineages of both palythoa and zoanthid have the ability to produce the toxin. Science also tells us that due to the plasticity of their evolution and the vast number of siblings distributed globally, that we can't tell by looks alone which specific lineages are carry the toxin.

You are fine playing "Russian Roulette" but you misunderstand the odds. Your prerogative, but misleading others as to the safety is the issue.

I actually thought this conversation was coming to an end but you seem absolutely despise it when others have a different opinions than you huh?

But don't hide behind "what science tells us" because the research about ornamental zoanthus is limited and therefore doesn't tells a lot in this particular case. Can you therefore show me a documented case of a poisoning with zoanthus (watermelons, fruit loops, blue hornets ect.)? If they contained dangerous concentrations of palytoxin we would hear about poisoning cases much more often, considering how many reefers are keeping then. Instead, in the rare cases of a poisoning, it's always the usual culprits.

We are all playing "Russian Roulette" all the time, but people that looked inside the barrel and seeing the empty chamber know that the odds of triggering a bullet are lower compared to the ones who didn't.

 

[Reefing_addiction]

And don't eat them... got it!

Or lick them

 

[Reefing_addiction]

Essentially be smart. Use common sense. When it comes to fragging anything take whatever precautions you feel like you need. Know the coral your fragging.

There is a difference between zoas and palys.
Know the difference.

 

[DJF]

Funny how much people worry about palytoxin but not just regular fish poop filled saltwater. For palytoxin- not to discount anyone’s experience but I have yet to hear of an instance that didn’t involve a lapse in judgement and carelessness. Just be mindful as you should always be putting your hand in a bacteria filled cesspool. But… if you want to be 100% on not getting palytoxin- don’t house palys.

 

[Reefing_addiction]

Funny how much people worry about palytoxin but not just regular fish poop filled saltwater. For palytoxin- not to discount anyone’s experience but I have yet to hear of an instance that didn’t involve a lapse in judgement and carelessness. Just be mindful as you should always be putting your hand in a bacteria filled cesspool. But… if you want to be 100% on not getting palytoxin- don’t house palys.

Have you seen tank water (especially stuff pulled from near the sand bed - say with a bit of algae or other detritus?

I swear it kinda made me want to

 

[The_Paradox]

But… if you want to be 100% on not getting palytoxin- don’t house palys.

Or dinoflagellates, or shellfish, or some algae, or any saltwater…

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

Based on picture and most said, gloves glasses, wear a face mask or mouth/nose guard just in case of splash or spray. Good ventilation. Just run A/c. Most inhilation issues I have read is from boiling or being sprayed in face. You could even take an old large aquarium, lay on side and do the work in it as guard. Still wear gloves.

Looks like its on flat surface. So take safety razer go slow and gently to scrape off like you would glass keeping blade flat against the object. Should be able to peel once enough is lifted. Or continue to scrape. Or if not comfortable talk with another local for help. Let us know how it goes.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I actually thought this conversation was coming to an end but you seem absolutely despise it when others have a different opinions than you huh?

No need to be aggressive. You can have whatever opinion you wish, but don't conflate it with fact and don't be upset because you didn't get the last word.

You indicated that we were talking past each other. I simply stated that you keep drifting from the point (this post point in case), as well as contradicting your own argument again (limited research means we can't be sure which do and do not carry the toxin, but we know some do).

But don't hide behind "what science tells us" because the research about ornamental zoanthus is limited and therefore doesn't tells a lot in this particular case.

I am not hiding behind anything. What is an "ornamental zoanthus" lol. You are doing at again, contradicting your own point.

Nonetheless, please review any of the tomes of research by James Reimer, Ludovic Sawelew, et al. and any of a dozen or more scientists with 30+ years of research in the field. Please read this passage from a 2021 palytoxin study. Note the the context - sibling distribution and the last sentence indicating that without genetic testing these animals cannot be positively identified (visual identification is not possible) along with the context that any lineage may produce palytoxin.

Can you therefore show me a documented case of a poisoning with zoanthus (watermelons, fruit loops, blue hornets ect.)?

You are straying from the point again. Nobody said that those particular "hobby names" were toxic. The larger point is that those hobby names mean nothing due to the fact that numerous siblings (different lineages) can be visually indistinguishable, but may be a lineage that carries the toxin.

The culprit was a zoanthid, not a palythoa - Parazoanthus sp. and the contact was in an aquarium through the fingers. Buy access if you wish, it can't be legally shared or posted. I will provide this basic summary.

When they analyzed the the coral they found extremely high concentrations of palytoxin approaching 3 mg/g.
The subject is lucky he did not die. That concentration is at the top end of what they have found in any paly or zoa from what I can gather form most studies that I have read.

If they contained dangerous concentrations of palytoxin we would hear about poisoning cases much more often,

There are threads all over the internet with direct attribution. Moreover, what is "dangerous"? A headache, heart palpitations, diarrhea, asthma, swelling, dizziness, death? There is evidence that cumulative sensitization can happen as well and over time people can have increasingly severe reactions. Additionally, how may cases are unreported, undiagnosed or misdiagnosed? Statistically for any other poisoning like this those numbers are grossly higher than the attributed reporting available by searching the internet.

You logic is based on fallacy.

You are in over your head - It is your choice to decide to learn or to remain obstinate based on whatever reason it is that prevents you from acknowledging the facts at hand.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Funny how much people worry about palytoxin but not just regular fish poop filled saltwater. For palytoxin- not to discount anyone’s experience but I have yet to hear of an instance that didn’t involve a lapse in judgement and carelessness. Just be mindful as you should always be putting your hand in a bacteria filled cesspool. But… if you want to be 100% on not getting palytoxin- don’t house palys.

That entire point is being mindful and treating any paly or zoa like it carries the same level of danger, as we can't positively identify those that are safe and those that are not.

Mishaps... yes, getting squirted in they eye (wear goggles) or absorption through the skin (wear gloves), etc. is the point. Don't let the juice run on the floor where your kid or dog can come in contact. Don't wash the tools in the sink with hot water. Don't touch your face, keep your mouth closed, etc..

This should not be controversial but so many of you are hellbent on pretending that "zoanthids" are not dangerous and "palythoa can be but most aren't" and that you ANY of you can positively identify (for the sake of toxicity) ANY of these animals without either genetic testing or positive chain of custody from somebody that did (genetic testing).

Lastly conflating this with other waterborn dangers, or any other danger is pure fallacy. Of course there are other dangerous and deadly things in context to your aquarium and those too should be acknowledged and addressed appropriately in their own context.