Kenneth Wingerter
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2019
- Messages
- 390
- Reaction score
- 580
In light of the ongoing uproar over UWC's apparent mislabeling of Vibrant, I'm left wondering... When will aquarium hobbyists demand that the contents of live microbial products ("bacteria-in-a-bottle," if you will) be explicitly identified? It may be true that there is no regulatory body outright requiring these companies to disclose such contents. However, consumer demand might compel many of the companies to volunteer this info accurately, completely and truthfully.
There is significant value in this info. For example, a consumer wouldn't needlessly waste money dosing their system with two products that contain the same species. Moreover, they would be better able to compare the cost/value of different products. The consumer could weigh a manufacturer's claims against the known properties of the species. They could add each different product in a prescribed, most efficacious order. They certainly could develop a more deliberate inoculation strategy, and even measure their success by monitoring the changes in abundances of these known species through services such as those offered by Aquabiomics. And of course, it would be much easier to lay bare any deceptive labeling.
I personally believe that most of the companies out there are producing great products and proudly serve the hobby/industry to the best of their ability. In most cases, I think, manufacturers withhold this information simply out of fear that others will copy them. Which is completely understandable. As someone who himself manages a company that cultures microbial products, I totally get the concern about copycats. Lord knows that we see this all the time with pods, phyto, etc. But ultimately I think that the consumer not only deserves this info, but also truly needs it to be able to provide the best possible environment for the animals in their care. Even further, our collective body of anecdotal data concerning microbial products would be much more meaningful and revealing and useful if this critical piece of info was available.
Over the many years I worked as a humble LFS store employee, I acted in my own (direct) interest only in the fourth order; third was in the interest of the company I worked for, second was in the interest of the customer, and foremost was the interest of the animals in our care. I get that this is a business, but I also think that if profit is your primary (or even sole) objective, then you should probably consider getting into a different kind of business. Seriously.
While I recognize the right of honest businesses to withhold certain kinds proprietary info (as we certainly do), I also would encourage a little more transparency. I mean, can you imagine if we were satisfied with labels that only said "fish food" or "pH increaser?" How many of us would ever order a generic "coral" from an online vendor? To me, that's pretty much what buying most microbial products is like right now. As someone who is both a tree-hugger and a hardcore capitalist, I say this... If you're going to copy us, go right ahead. And if you develop a better product than ours, congrats. But I will work my aZ$ off to beat you back. And all of this will be in the best interest of the animals (and therefore the consumer, and pretty much everyone really).
Not even asking that manufacturers list the culture medium ingredients, or provide a CFU number, or identify the live contents to the level of strain or even species... But come on, not even the genus? To say the least, something like "95% bacterial blend" doesn't meet any meaningful standard or even make much sense. If the allegations against UWC turn out to be true (I sincerely hope they're not), then maybe we should all reflect upon all the marinelife that potentially could have been spared if the hobby/industry had been able to check the manufacturer's claims sooner and better. Hell, Vibrant may not have ever existed, certainly not as it has been marketed.
That's my rant. Your thoughts?
There is significant value in this info. For example, a consumer wouldn't needlessly waste money dosing their system with two products that contain the same species. Moreover, they would be better able to compare the cost/value of different products. The consumer could weigh a manufacturer's claims against the known properties of the species. They could add each different product in a prescribed, most efficacious order. They certainly could develop a more deliberate inoculation strategy, and even measure their success by monitoring the changes in abundances of these known species through services such as those offered by Aquabiomics. And of course, it would be much easier to lay bare any deceptive labeling.
I personally believe that most of the companies out there are producing great products and proudly serve the hobby/industry to the best of their ability. In most cases, I think, manufacturers withhold this information simply out of fear that others will copy them. Which is completely understandable. As someone who himself manages a company that cultures microbial products, I totally get the concern about copycats. Lord knows that we see this all the time with pods, phyto, etc. But ultimately I think that the consumer not only deserves this info, but also truly needs it to be able to provide the best possible environment for the animals in their care. Even further, our collective body of anecdotal data concerning microbial products would be much more meaningful and revealing and useful if this critical piece of info was available.
Over the many years I worked as a humble LFS store employee, I acted in my own (direct) interest only in the fourth order; third was in the interest of the company I worked for, second was in the interest of the customer, and foremost was the interest of the animals in our care. I get that this is a business, but I also think that if profit is your primary (or even sole) objective, then you should probably consider getting into a different kind of business. Seriously.
While I recognize the right of honest businesses to withhold certain kinds proprietary info (as we certainly do), I also would encourage a little more transparency. I mean, can you imagine if we were satisfied with labels that only said "fish food" or "pH increaser?" How many of us would ever order a generic "coral" from an online vendor? To me, that's pretty much what buying most microbial products is like right now. As someone who is both a tree-hugger and a hardcore capitalist, I say this... If you're going to copy us, go right ahead. And if you develop a better product than ours, congrats. But I will work my aZ$ off to beat you back. And all of this will be in the best interest of the animals (and therefore the consumer, and pretty much everyone really).
Not even asking that manufacturers list the culture medium ingredients, or provide a CFU number, or identify the live contents to the level of strain or even species... But come on, not even the genus? To say the least, something like "95% bacterial blend" doesn't meet any meaningful standard or even make much sense. If the allegations against UWC turn out to be true (I sincerely hope they're not), then maybe we should all reflect upon all the marinelife that potentially could have been spared if the hobby/industry had been able to check the manufacturer's claims sooner and better. Hell, Vibrant may not have ever existed, certainly not as it has been marketed.
That's my rant. Your thoughts?
Last edited:
I agree with you.
