My speculation: Vibrant has some fluconazole in it...

[MnFish1]

Idk there is something to be said about honesty in labeling and not accepting companies that try to push this hobby back to the dark ages.

There is - so I will ask you a favor - go to all the products you use. Do they all have all of the ingredients listed in an EPA document. For example. People dose phosphate and nitrate - in an attempt to control 'various algae'. Are they all EPA approved (obviously - not talking about those products that are not labeled as such - ie, generic potassium nitrate, etc). The fact is - UWC is correct - whether right or wrong - most of the products we use - are not able to pass the tests asked for here (i.e. labeling). I am struck by the fact that one of the major testers - some dozens of pages into the thread - did not realize that at least one version of algaefix contained bacteria. etc etc. Its up to the user to decide. use it or dont use it iMHO. Great - either way.

 

[Dan_P]

You know what is amazing the folks that are bashing a vendor…why the need for that…it’s your choice to use it or not …this thread has gotten to the point it’s ridiculous…do I care vibrant is not answering , maybe, but in the end it’s up to me if I want to use it or not…some of you are just unbelievable

So why bash a vendor? That would be an interesting post to start. And include a poll, “who are the most bashable”?

The vendors might learn something from this post about how to deal with the public, like “avoiding school yard taunts”. Jeff provided a couple examples of dumb-butt and not very professional responses one should avoid making to an “angry” mob.

 

[MnFish1]

I am discussing it with the Company, right now on this thread. Or atleast trying to. Am I not?

Not continuing this troll game with you. I am done wasting my time with you.

I dont care what you do lol - I just answered your post - which to me - had very little logic behind it. but - in case you dont know the policy at R2R - these topics are to be discussed on the vendor feedback thread. Not with multiple people. So - I would humbly suggest = read the TOS- and do what they say

 

[DrZoidburg]

Care to enlighten us? Or maybe you have some tests that could disprove algaecide? Or tests that might prove or rule out what you suspect?

Honestly yes I could test this. I think however if these test were done right a water soluble complex may influence a color change which we did not see.(algaecide pq) Imo it is not what is in question because of a few things. Maybe the same for guar? (guessing maybe additive I don't know). What I propose is not 100% either, I admit this but it could be tested before going to any conclusion. Reason being some could precipitate, others wont. I would never just go by color changing indicators.

 

[JCOLE]

I dont care what you do lol - I just answered your post - which to me - had very little logic behind it. but - in case you dont know the policy at R2R - these topics are to be discussed on the vendor feedback thread. Not with multiple people. So - I would humbly suggest = read the TOS- and do what they say

LOL this wasn't a feedback thread. The company decided to chime into this thread by themselves and opened communication with others, including myself.

Or perhaps it is because they are a PAYING vendor and "thou shalt not speak to them" rules apply.

 

[MnFish1]

So why bash a vendor? That would be an interesting post to start. And include a poll, “who are the most bashable”?

The vendors might learn something from this post about how to deal with the public, like “avoiding school yard taunts”. Jeff provided a couple examples of dumb-butt and not very professional responses one should avoid making to an “angry” mob.

I guess if I was Jeff - I would make the same response. 1. He is being accused of being a 'fraud' - using pseudoscience. 2. I agree with you - that on the surface the response does not answer the question. But - I guess see #1. There seems to be a 'thing' - how do we debunk a product. In doing so - testing is done that is not designed for what its originally designed for. This has become a theme. With no vetting - except for 'popular' opinion. To me that is not correct.

 

[MnFish1]

LOL this wasn't a feedback thread. The company decided to chime into this thread by themselves and opened communication with others, including myself.

Or perhaps it is because they are a PAYING vendor and "thow shall not speak to them" rules apply.

I reported the thread a while ago - once this started happening - because - at least some of the posts are becoming 'attack the vendor' - as compared to - discussing the research. I have supported (in freshwater) - and questioned the vendor - I have no axe to grind.

 

[Miami Reef]

I feel every vendor should first and foremost be honest in its products.

 

[JCOLE]

I guess if I was Jeff - I would make the same response. 1. He is being accused of being a 'fraud' - using pseudoscience. 2. I agree with you - that on the surface the response does not answer the question. But - I guess see #1. There seems to be a 'thing' - how do we debunk a product. In doing so - testing is done that is not designed for what its originally designed for. This has become a theme. With no vetting - except for 'popular' opinion. To me that is not correct.

No one was accusing or has accused him of anything. What they have said is they want them to be 100% transparent about the product.

 

[a.t.t.r]

There is - so I will ask you a favor - go to all the products you use. Do they all have all of the ingredients listed in an EPA document. For example. People dose phosphate and nitrate - in an attempt to control 'various algae'. Are they all EPA approved (obviously - not talking about those products that are not labeled as such - ie, generic potassium nitrate, etc). The fact is - UWC is correct - whether right or wrong - most of the products we use - are not able to pass the tests asked for here (i.e. labeling). I am struck by the fact that one of the major testers - some dozens of pages into the thread - did not realize that at least one version of algaefix contained bacteria. etc etc. Its up to the user to decide. use it or dont use it iMHO. Great - either way.

I tend to avoid products that are not labeled or incorrectly labeled . Nothing is perfect but there is a not so fine line between failing to label and lying about how a product works. One is buyer beware the other is fraud. If I claimed an all natural bacterial driven clog remover but it was really just liquid plumber rebottled and mislabeled would you be saying the same thing? I also am aware of chemicals being in things like kalkwasser by the nature of the refining process and impurity that however is not a deliberate ingredient and gets a pass in my book.

 

[polyppal]

the fact that this ridiculousness has gone on for 28 pages is ridiculously ridiculous

 

[MnFish1]

I tend to avoid products that are not labeled or incorrectly labeled . Nothing is perfect but there is a not so fine line between failing to label and lying about how a product works. One is buyer beware the other is fraud. If I claimed an all natural bacterial driven clog remover but it was really just liquid plumber rebottled and mislabeled would you be saying the same thing? I also am aware of chemicals being in things like kalkwasser by the nature of the refining process and impurity that however is not a deliberate ingredient and gets a pass in my book.

I agree with you. I have said it once - I'll say it again - I have not seen conclusive proof that 1) there is fluconazole in the product (the OP) - or 2) QAC to the same degree as algaefix as proposed by some. I believe I have seen a clear statement that 1 is not true from the vendor. I have not seen a clear statement of #2, But - I also stated - In this case - I don't care. If the product works - it works.

AFAIK - either one or two could be true. Do I wish every vendor was more transparent - YES - of course.

 

[taricha]

Hmmm... I wonder what test ought to be done that would distinguish the Vibrant quat-like ingredient from the known quat in AlgaeFix? ....

For those concerned about whether tests posted here have received enough scrutiny, I'll collect what's been done and post it over in the chem forum in a couple of days.

(Perhaps it'll need to be tightly moderated judging from some comments.)

 

[mojo8427]

Look - Imho - here is the decision: Use the product - or don't use the product. The tests -again - though awesome - show a correlation - not a causation. I'm somewhat concerned that people are deciding to do tests to 'debunk' products - with various methods - key - that have to be modiified - to show results. This is a repetitive topic. I requested @Daniel@R2R to start an experiment topic here - to post all of these things together - but it seems like some just want to try to 'debunk' products. all good - if those tests are valid. To me this needs to be vetted. No offense to the people doing testing. I'm sure they have valid reasons for what they are doing. But - they ignore the reasons that their tests are not valid - according to the methods in the original research (at least to my reading)

Thus - to me - it comes down to - does the product work? Yes or No.
Does it cause damage - Yes or No?

For example - a lot of people feed their coral - I do not - can I prove that they are wrong? No. etc etc

Well, shouldn't you at least know what product you're using? Wouldn't that information give insight into what caused damage? Maybe I'm failing to understand the logic of this...

Since so many have had Dino blooms or lost coral after dosing Vibrant "bacteria." You're cool with I don't know what it is or what it does, but this thread needs to end because people are making a good faith effort to reveal the unknown and misleading ingredients.

 

[a.t.t.r]

Well, shouldn't you at least know what product you're using? Wouldn't that information give insight into what caused damage? Maybe I'm failing to understand the logic of this...

Since so many have had Dino blooms or lost coral after dosing Vibrant "bacteria." You're cool with I don't know what it is or what it does, but this thread needs to end because people are making a good faith effort to reveal the unknown and misleading ingredients.

I did not want to mention it but I am fighting dinos right now after a single use of vibrant. Never had an issue with dino's in 20 years in the hobby. I added it thinking at worst I was adding some more bio diversity since liverock is almost impossible to find anymore around here.

 

[DrZoidburg]

what test

Tests you cant do, cant, or wont. Ie solvent extractions, melting points of precipitates, or other predictable chemical tests. Which I mentioned way earlier. Strong evidence that it is just amino acids based on things that can be found in research papers. Also yes me for example I don't trust your tests from past history, or do I trust your motives.. I look at some of the prices for acs reagent grate chemicals, and decide nope... No point in proving a point that doesn't need to be proved because the seller has said they would say something.

 

[mojo8427]

I did not want to mention it but I am fighting dinos right now after a single use of vibrant. Never had an issue with dino's in 20 years in the hobby. I added it thinking at worst I was adding some more bio diversity since liverock is almost impossible to find anymore around here.

You're definitely not alone in the Dino outbreak post-vibrant. Same thing happened to me but I assumed vibrant was bacteria. Now UWC is implying that there isn't any bacteria in Vibrant but we have to wait until 6/2022 to find out.

I'm not sure how the two main persons flacking for Vibrant keep dismissing Tarichas work as biased or declaring the conversation pointless to continue. Yet keep commenting. Whilst giving full faith into a local aquarium cleaning company that discovered, then isolated a bacteria species that polymerized an algecidal product. That tests identical to the polyquat in AlgaeFix, but isn't. Their customers were so amazed with the companies cleaning they wanted their own bottled 95% bacteria blend producing algaecide - that contains no bacteria per UWC's recent post.

...or it's algaefix.

Edit: They also contacted the EPA who told them not to register what is clearly a pesticide. Because that is what the government does, refuse application fees.

The thing I find bizarre, are the people who say they don't care what Vibrant says it is nor do they care what it actually is - or does for that matter. How can you when you don't know the active ingredient.

 

[mojo8427]

So I went through some of their other product threads like Purge.

I have no experience with Purge or with API Melafix but others have noticed similarities in effect. Any odds of UWC ripping off Melafix in similar fashion?

API registered with the EPA as a tea tree extract. Whereas Vibrants Purge didn't register (they said they would register it in their official product thread but failed to do so - odd). Their product page lists it as a "Natural Herb Blend" lol.

If anything, that thread is a good read. UWC starts with Purge being the most amazing, 100% reef safe product. The following pages are about tank crashes, dead sps, snake oil, etc.

This company just rubs me the wrong way.

BREAKING NEWS! We Have Officially Eradicated AEFW's With A 100% Reef Safe IN TANK Treatment.

That's right ladies and gentlemen, Its a HUGE day in the reefing world and I feel as if I cannot contain this info any longer. The pest that has riddled our beloved acropora for years, will soon be a thing of the past. I am happy to announce that we have officially eradicated AEFW's with a in...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[a.t.t.r]

Whilst giving full faith into a local aquarium cleaning company that discovered, then isolated a bacteria species that polymerized an algecidal product. That tests identical to the polyquat in AlgaeFix, but isn't.

This is my favorite part. A nobody (at the time) aquarium company spent money doing research on a product they did not intend to sell. I don't know why but my BS meter went off on that as well.

 

[DrZoidburg]

So

How is a herbal blend even related to the matter at hand? I'll tell you I make my own herbal blend for corals.. I will also tell you to not use it on some things. Just like the whole don't use coral rx on deep water acros thing, or with some inverts. So 100% safe I don't agree yet with, nor do I know what's in it. Nor am I going to read 88 pages about more speculation. Again how do we even know it wasn't the tank owner or conditions? This now you know I don't work for them.

This is my favorite part. A nobody (at the time) aquarium company spent money doing research on a product they did not intend to sell. I don't know why but my BS meter went off on that as well.

How can you even call someone a nobody, how do you even know what they did during or before that is just foolish.