I was genuinely curious whether you had a point ..... clearly not (ooh, is that trolling). I can be forgiven I suppose for one out of 13,000 posts lol. Happy reefing!
My point is the 72 day standard is 100% based of off irrelevant information,(cold water where ich has been documented to slow down its lifecycle) nobody has been able to deny that. Take it or leave it.
A study is not irrevelvant simply because you believe it to be. Since the study has to do with Crypto and salt water fish it remains relevant. Yes, the conditions may be different from the study you are referring to but if you really want to prove it irrevelvant then go conduct your own study and use the conditions found in the reef keeping hobby.
Go look at the article timfish posted that says 3-6 weeks citing 75-80 degree water.
A study is absolutely not relevant if it is not conducted in the same conditions our fish live in. Especially if there are studys that show ich slows down in cold water, and said study is conducted in cold water.
You are ridiculous, you've proven nothing. An absence does not constitute proof of anything.
I gave you a paper citing the 3-6 weeks with an approval temp range. Yet you cling to a study in 68 degree water to dictate proper quarantine times. In my experience, 30 days has always been sufficient. 72 days is insanity unless somebody can give me anything to the contrary.
Oh boy. My post has more than proved. You feel better about yourself now?
Also to be fair. The post someone else put that you're talking about, was ment to discredit my argument and ending up supporting it.
Everything you say is added with a nasty comment, I just can't take you seriously.
Huh? So you know that they proved a strain to live for 72 days but you are arguing what exactly?
He came here looking for a fight.
