IS IT TRUE THAT 80% OF PEOPLE WILL HAVE FISH LOSSES DUE TO DISEASE/PARASITES IN FIRST 8 MONTHS IF DONT QUARANTINE ?

TSM Aquatics

i cant think

Valuable Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 1, 2021
Messages
1,905
Reaction score
1,431
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
England
Remake this thread in the fish disease forum so it’s not safe zoned lemme see it on page three.


I notice all responses here come from the single reef owner perspective


this whole thread is about what people think worked best for their tank

whats missing: any data whatsoever that we can link to read what happens in others tanks, none of you have anything on the line for making the assessments and if you ran public work threads, you would and I could read that for proof myself without your summary being the sole proof.

it’s easy to lie, omit bad info outcomes when all the data comes from our own summaries, you all put too much focus on what you can do and there’s little focus on what you can do to stem problems others are having



if that’s wrong, or over generalized about this crowd, show me the work links, insert them right here for me to click —->

my comments come from managing countless linkable right now cycle productions for others, and the endpoint is massive disease issues. Thats where my data comes from, others tanks, this safety thread is just about owners reefs.


Elora


specifically a request for you: omit any example involving your own tank. Link here now a thread where you managed any aspect of reefing for others, they tried the recommend, and logged the results. If you don’t provide that, I’ll think all your data is made up with the bad parts omitted and the good parts played up. Yin yang, remake this exact post in the fish disease forum. If I take time to log outbound cycle work for a decade on others reefs solely and all that data is ready now, you can read it, and I tell you disease is the issue-you would get your notepad out vs give kickback. You wouldn’t take your first year of reefing practice as a go ahead to advise folks to skip qt.

don’t go to a place where clearly most entrants are opposed to disease preps and try and gain support using zero public tank examples.
I’m confused, you want to know what worked best for others? But you want to know 10 or so other tanks this also worked for?
What’s the point in the “What worked best for others” if you don’t rely on a good 1-9 minute write up on what happened in a person’s tank over the course of anywhere between 8 months to several years?
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,865
Reaction score
17,898
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
Agreed Seb

Im not trying to please resident statisticians with my sampling it’s loose, but it’s not a guess either, and any time we run that loose lookup just a few pages the majority is always from youngish tanks.

we wouldn’t have one iota of insight about any trending there at all without some sort of arrangement and enumeration of post patterns. We wouldn’t get that insight by reading about tanks that are mature, and have no disease issues, some reports must be scrubbed from any sample set to pare down what we want to inspect.

it’s to the degree when combined with years and years of logged cycling patterns I feel that training now for all new tankers should directly involve actions from Jays disease forum vs anywhere else. When new tankers read about correct and ethical ways to reef, they read Jays recommends and other ways aren’t ethical. The other ways for stocking up brand new cycled tanks, young tanks, comprise the majority loss posts any way we want to look at it. 80% might have had some flare added lol


as if y’all would have accepted 56% as any more valid, you’ll dig in heels permanently against disease prep as nobody is depending on you to make their reefs run, and you’re already good at it at home and can easily just buy more fish to replace losses.
We are all terribly access spoiled to be able to replace fish as quickly as we want due to avoidable losses.



all my cycle assessments begin with disease preps because that’s the pressing need at hand, it’s not ammonia control. I can’t find one single post on this whole board rn of a tank that can’t control ammonia: even in the cycle help ones.


cycling is a done deal we can’t mess it up, water bac it turns out always do fine in water. All the focus now goes to disease prep it’s just too early in the game for the sidelines to notice, you have to be on the field.
 
Last edited:
OP
ying yang

ying yang

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
4,748
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Liverpool
Yeah I was trying to get a rough gauge of how many fish die from not qt from everyone and not just people who started a thread saying they got sick fish or fishes dead.
And above post makes a good point of more experienced people will have better chance of knowing what to do or what medication to dose if got a sick fish so less likely to start a thread asking how or what dieseses there fish actually have as I know for 6 years now im constantly researching. In average day I'm looking/ researching 2- 4 hours about anything saltwater related whether it be threads on here or articles or videos etc
 

HuduVudu

Valuable Member
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
2,097
Reaction score
2,345
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
Location
Houston
Ok to begin proofing solely off page one of the fish disease forum, it seems 17 posts are for help, so out of 17 posters I’m about to go discover who’s younger than eight months, I did this once for ten straight pages but it was last year. I wasn’t just making up my % from the sky, it’s from legit patterns in my cycle threads and what I’m about to recount coming up
I think it would be helpful for you to take a course on statistics. You will be shocked.

You are currently experiencing what is called sample bias. This is why it is very important to get random samples. To note, statistics can be helpful, but you have to be VERY careful the conclusions you draw from the data that you have.
 

HuduVudu

Valuable Member
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
2,097
Reaction score
2,345
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
Location
Houston
Im not trying to please resident statisticians with my sampling it’s loose
Then admitedly your conclusions will be "loose". Be careful with this stuff, it is easy to be very very very wrong.
 
Click to watch best scape method in 5 easy steps!

Big Smelly fish

Active Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
172
Reaction score
246
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Denham Springs , Louisiana
I don’t agree with the percentage in the title, have no ideal where that number or timeframe came from.
Now if it said 80% of people in the hobby don’t quarantine new fish, I think the majority of people don’t for a number of reasons, time and space along with cost. may even be nearer to 90%.
 

Garf

Valuable Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
1,763
Reaction score
2,291
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Then admitedly your conclusions will be "loose". Be careful with this stuff, it is easy to be very very very wrong.
The simple fact about most things is that the more you understand about a topic, the more you realize you don’t understand it at all. Maybe that’s just me :)
 

HuduVudu

Valuable Member
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
2,097
Reaction score
2,345
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
Location
Houston
and have no disease issues, some reports must be scrubbed from any sample set to pare down what we want to inspect.
You are introducing bias into samples ... my gawd this is terrible.

Look up why the shuttle Discovery went down. This is classic statistical error.
 

HuduVudu

Valuable Member
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
2,097
Reaction score
2,345
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
Location
Houston
The simple fact about most things is that the more you understand about a topic, the more you realize you don’t understand it at all. Maybe that’s just me :)
I wanted to feel smarter, but now I just feel dumber. Why o Why does life have to do this to me. :p
 

HuduVudu

Valuable Member
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
2,097
Reaction score
2,345
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
Location
Houston
as if y’all would have accepted 56% as any more valid, you’ll dig in heels permanently against disease prep as nobody is depending on you to make their reefs run, and you’re already good at it at home and can easily just buy more fish to replace losses.
We are all terribly access spoiled to be able to replace fish as quickly as we want due to avoidable losses.
My gawd ... why are you saying this? This is just so wrong I can't believe it.

I don't want to replace my fish, anymore than I want to replace my cat ... or for dog lovers out there their dogs. This is just cruel and dishonest. I love my fish, I name them. They all have names ... ALL of them. Perhaps the calousness that you have is because you are dealing with people that will not accept that they are failing at what they are doing. Most people that are having problems will not accept my advice for whatever reason. They cite difficulty, they cite many reasons. They continue to fail. They need to do some more controlled reefing. I hope that you made this statement out of ignorance not malice, because it is so offensive to me that I can't really express it without not wanting to punch the screen.
 
Fritz

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,930
Reaction score
13,863
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Since I've used all 4 methods over the years - I'll answer each one:

1. I do an observational qt on all newly bought fish for ..... length of time .and also to get fish eating properley away from other fish. This is what I do now. I buy from a fish store that does observation and medication if needed. No losses - 10-20 fish

2. I do a medicated qt on all newly bought fish and I use the following medications and follow jay hemdal or humblefish recomendations on dosage/ duration. I did this in the distant past. I did not see any difference between 'losses' and 'no losses' so I quit.

3. I only do medicated qt if fish shows sign of ill health . I do this - have had perhaps 50 percent losses (this was in the past)

4. I dont qt and just temp/ drip aclimitise my fish then add straight to display tank or some I read add to sump. I used to always do this after my stint with QT - and lost a rare fish perhaps <10 percent. Then - I bought multiple fish from an online retailer - and within a week all the fish (including some that were years old) were dead - presumed due to velvet.

I do not QT CUC or corals - and have had 0 losses.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,930
Reaction score
13,863
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Not hung up on it.a r2r member keeps saying it over and over and there to many fish deaths because no qt,think I've read them saying they done the maths to get to that % on r2r and as asked question of this thread many times and got no answer ,I thought ok fair enough I start a thread.
And yeah qt fish to protect all fish in dt who in there first I get this but as you can see from some the answers here and precious threads,some believe that using medications on fishes that didn't need it is detrimental to the fish,and I know way to know whether this statement is true or not so often leaves me very confused indeed,as we all wants whats best for our fish and for them not to die in our care and upto each of us to do our best for our little fishy friends ^_^
Thanks for reply
I think you have to address a couple things about that figure.

1. Its true that a lot of fish taken from the ocean - do not make it to a tank (in someone's home). Thats a supply chain issue. - and probably where these high numbers are coming from
2. There are a LOT of reasons people can be successful with and without QT. Stocking density is one. First because of parasite density Second because of bullying. Continuously looking for 'deals' i.e. cheap fish to me is another. (how were they collected, treated, etc)
3. Fish die of a LOT of things unrelated to disease. For example - different salinities, etc - between the LFS and the tank. A fish collected with cyanide, etc. Stress. Bullying.
4. With all due respect - another question to perhaps ask is - how many people have lost a significant number of fish (that were doing fine in their tank previously) after adding a new fish. This to me is perhaps the most tragic issue - where people lose fish (as I did) they have had for years) - after adding a new fish.
5. In reality - I think once the fish gets to your house - the mortality of the 'new fish' with or without QT is the same.
 

Big Smelly fish

Active Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
172
Reaction score
246
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Denham Springs , Louisiana
Since I've used all 4 methods over the years - I'll answer each one:

1. I do an observational qt on all newly bought fish for ..... length of time .and also to get fish eating properley away from other fish. This is what I do now. I buy from a fish store that does observation and medication if needed. No losses - 10-20 fish

2. I do a medicated qt on all newly bought fish and I use the following medications and follow jay hemdal or humblefish recomendations on dosage/ duration. I did this in the distant past. I did not see any difference between 'losses' and 'no losses' so I quit.

3. I only do medicated qt if fish shows sign of ill health . I do this - have had perhaps 50 percent losses (this was in the past)

4. I dont qt and just temp/ drip aclimitise my fish then add straight to display tank or some I read add to sump. I used to always do this after my stint with QT - and lost a rare fish perhaps <10 percent. Then - I bought multiple fish from an online retailer - and within a week all the fish (including some that were years old) were dead - presumed due to velvet.

I do not QT CUC or corals - and have had 0 losses.
For me your number 1 you’re doing now makes the most sense,
I also buy from just one shop and have found he handles and treat fish and won’t sell a sick fish. When I introduce into display I temp acclimate only and place fish in and discard the back and water.
coral I temp acclimate and then decide then how to mount and if I want to remove plug. I will also do a coral dip. Not always. Depending on where and from who I purchased
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,930
Reaction score
13,863
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Always QT- 72 days observation only unless needed. No lost fish out of 14 including a copperband.
And this says a lot - because what your results seem to suggest is that you could potentially have dropped them in the tank?
 

SebM

Community Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Oct 25, 2021
Messages
32
Reaction score
66
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Kent
Since I've used all 4 methods over the years - I'll answer each one:

1. I do an observational qt on all newly bought fish for ..... length of time .and also to get fish eating properley away from other fish. This is what I do now. I buy from a fish store that does observation and medication if needed. No losses - 10-20 fish

2. I do a medicated qt on all newly bought fish and I use the following medications and follow jay hemdal or humblefish recomendations on dosage/ duration. I did this in the distant past. I did not see any difference between 'losses' and 'no losses' so I quit.

3. I only do medicated qt if fish shows sign of ill health . I do this - have had perhaps 50 percent losses (this was in the past)

4. I dont qt and just temp/ drip aclimitise my fish then add straight to display tank or some I read add to sump. I used to always do this after my stint with QT - and lost a rare fish perhaps <10 percent. Then - I bought multiple fish from an online retailer - and within a week all the fish (including some that were years old) were dead - presumed due to velvet.

I do not QT CUC or corals - and have had 0 losses.
I do 4 but never, ever order fish online. Most of the time I reserve fish at a LFS I trust, and come back a week later to look at the fish and then come back after another week to buy it/them.

What fish did you add when you lost some of your existing fish to velvet? Did the new arrivals cause any stress to the existing ones? I’m just asking because velvet is latent on many fish, possibly the majority of what we buy, and it only causes illness (and then most often death) if fish are stressed/weakened.
 
Tidal Gardens

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,930
Reaction score
13,863
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
I just did the count it's 54% under eight months posting for help on disease in a display, and 45% are posting for display help over eight months. Run it out a few pages, the trend hits about 66% anyone feel free to check. Not 80% and also not the minority either, it's right there on page one in the disease forum: a majority of disease help posts appear in under eight months.

If 80% was too high to speculate, and it includes my own assessment from directly inspecting thousands of cycles we log a few months after completion, I'm open to seeing anyone else's data just don't tell me one speck about what happened in your home i only value what works in lots of 20 reefs at a time.
Thanks for looking at the data that way. But - it still doesn't say anything about the question - because people NOT posting in the disease forum aren't included. By definition - only people with problems post there. The second thing is 'where does 8 months come from'? Why not 4 months or 10 months or 2 months. Or 2 years for that matter?
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,930
Reaction score
13,863
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
What fish did you add when you lost some of your existing fish to velvet? Did the new arrivals cause any stress to the existing ones? I’m just asking because velvet is latent on many fish, possibly the majority of what we buy, and it only causes illness (and then most often death) if fish are stressed/weakened.
2 Moorish idols - and they did not bully anyone. They were slow to eat - and because they were bought online - I did not know their condition. After 2-3 days they were eating. In a week everything was dead (fish-wise)
 

sixty_reefer

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
2,853
Reaction score
4,904
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
The Reef
Hopefully that post in the disease forum will get some more entrants.
This one?

 

astiesi

Community Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
47
Reaction score
109
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Boca Raton, FL
Now I see 3 different posts showing up on my home page on the same topic with the same set of arguments that I still cannot follow, not due to the data but more due to the fact that the arguments are not focused whatsoever. As such, I don't even know who I agree with at this point. This is quite problematic based upon the initial argument regarding what the messaging should be to new reefers during their initial research and setup.

Are we talking about the initial nitrogen cycle, are we talking about quarantining, are we talking about pre-emptive medicating? Not to mention each of these arguments change based upon the overall goal... are we attempting to protect the fish being quarantined or the fish in the display that they are being added to? Are we attempting to create a display devoid of any type of parasites and protect it at all costs or are we attempting to increase the odds that the latest addition to the display survives 6+ months?

Without answering these basic questions I'm not sure any of this back and forth is even remotely useful.

For what it's worth, I have never officially quarantined a fish however I was also not attempting to protect a 100+ gallon display. To me, the added stress to the new fish in performing a mediated QT was not worth it and I instead choose to be very selective in what I added and when. I am considering with my new build an observation QT as I have some older clowns that I am looking to protect when adding to a new (larger but not large) tank. Up until now I've been personally successful, however this is only personal experience and apparently cannot be considered here unless in a "work thread"... whatever that is.
 

Toys For Kids Drive

Untitled-2 copy.jpg

TSM Aquatics

Have you ever had a nano reef tank?

  • I have one now (leave a photo in the thread)

    Votes: 176 47.3%
  • Yes, but in the past

    Votes: 82 22.0%
  • No and no plans to have one

    Votes: 59 15.9%
  • No but I want to have one in the future

    Votes: 48 12.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 7 1.9%
TCK Corals
Top