Open challenge for the hobby: prove that fish-in cycles harm fish.

[brandon429]

Rich I'm in full agreement.

Even the rare times where bottle bac was fully dead, and I've never come across this one time in thousands of online cycles logged to completion and several where Seneye was tracking the progress, dilution and potential secondary inputs of filtration bacteria are carrying the system until the critical day ten mark (the ammonia drop time shown on any cycle chart)


though we need more data to know what happens across every bottle bac cycle, the available seneye fish+bottle bac cycles sure seem to agree also, that bottle bac + fish + huge dilution isn't allowing ammonia noncontrol to push nh3 above safety thresholds.

The statement: "cycling with fish and bottle bac harms fish" is one of the enduring misnomers in reefing. that statement is one thousand percent coming from API owners who have not converted that slight green ammonia reading nh4 into the correct nh3 reading we factor in reef tanks. when they do, it's within safety spec and the behavior of their fish lines up with the reading, but not as an initial nh4 read.

when people who report ammonia alerts are trained to read their sample as 12x~ lower before reporting, and that no tank runs with zero nh3, they feel alot better before making the panic relay.

 

[brandon429]

Rich I'm also frankly stunned you didn't post a vehement, angry, resolute, heels-dug-in response that fish+bottle bac cycles harm fish and that I'm a troll for even investigating the claim.

that's coming, next reader most likely

the topic is too hot button for everyone to reflect with any positivity I'm finding. eventually, unconverted nh4 readings off API will have the masses convinced of our errors.

 

[monkeyCmonkeyDo]

I'm sorry but I don't believe in bottle bacteria or fresh water dips.
D

 

[jda]

I will post that you are a troll taking credit for things that would have happened anyway, asking for proof of things that nobody can prove while also suggesting that things that you know to be true also cannot be proven who preys on the inexperienced reefer. Some fish might not die in a cycle, but moderate ammonia levels are proven to harm their gills. This is like saying that people who survived chemical gas, meso or the like and are still alive are OK - prove that they are not. He also discounts the people who have had issues are trolls, haters, etc. when they had textbook issues with what he has outlined.

Prove that all fish to survive the cycles that you suggest are not harmed. There is a bounty if you can.

Of course, I am just a real reefer with real tanks and do not just posture about like a know-it-all on a message board without actually reefing. I have no skin in the game of bottled bacteria. Keep the ammonia levels low and stuff will be ok - bottled bacteria, or not. Nitrite does not matter. Cycles can repeat themselves if they were too shallow the first time - prove that they do not and get a bounty. There is nothing new that brandon has EVER posted, yet he takes claim for a lot of it like he is saving the hobby from some imaginary force. The strawman that he constantly sets up does not exist.

When people do make good points, he goes back and edits his posts to act like he was out in front of things. It is incredibly disingenuous and dishonest.

In the end, a self-promoting blowhard with nothing new to add. Of course he can predict that a poster will soon chime in with something different. This is out of the current-politician handbook only without threats of litigation. Just claim that everybody else is posting fake news, that you are the only one who can save things - send him a chat, you know, since the best and most honest only have to work in the shadows.

The worst part is that he lacks the self awareness to know that any of this is going on.

 

[brandon429]

This will help you further not believe in bottle bacteria efficacy:

Bacteria in a bottle, Myth or Fact

Call me old school, back in the day we placed a deli shrimp in a tank to kick start the cycle. When tank reached 1.5-2 ppm ammonia we pulled it out and waited sometimes weeks to months for bacteria to colonize and drop ammonia and nitrites down to 0 to make tank safe for livestock. With recent...

www.reef2reef.com

You can see that functionally, they work on a known timescale. Regarding best practices, if you're meaning that, I agree live rock skip cycles are best

 

[Cell]

I will post that you are a troll taking credit for things that would have happened anyway, asking for proof of things that nobody can prove while also suggesting that things that you know to be true also cannot be proven who preys on the inexperienced reefer. Some fish might not die in a cycle, but moderate ammonia levels are proven to harm their gills. This is like saying that people who survived chemical gas, meso or the like and are still alive are OK - prove that they are not. He also discounts the people who have had issues are trolls, haters, etc. when they had textbook issues with what he has outlined.

Prove that all fish to survive the cycles that you suggest are not harmed. There is a bounty if you can.

Of course, I am just a real reefer with real tanks and do not just posture about like a know-it-all on a message board without actually reefing. I have no skin in the game of bottled bacteria. Keep the ammonia levels low and stuff will be ok - bottled bacteria, or not. Nitrite does not matter. Cycles can repeat themselves if they were too shallow the first time - prove that they do not and get a bounty. There is nothing new that brandon has EVER posted, yet he takes claim for a lot of it like he is saving the hobby from some imaginary force. The strawman that he constantly sets up does not exist.

When people do make good points, he goes back and edits his posts to act like he was out in front of things. It is incredibly disingenuous and dishonest.

In the end, a self-promoting blowhard with nothing new to add. Of course he can predict that a poster will soon chime in with something different. This is out of the current-politician handbook only without threats of litigation. Just claim that everybody else is posting fake news, that you are the only one who can save things - send him a chat, you know, since the best and most honest only have to work in the shadows.

The worst part is that he lacks the self awareness to know that any of this is going on.

Who hurt you?

 

[HomebroodExotics]

Who hurt you?

an expert fishbowler

 

[brandon429]

JDA is on my ignore list, he only follows my posts to attempt to be warlike, all the time. I’m not going to respond, not worth it, he’s not posting here or any other thread I’m in respectfully or helpfully. JDA isn’t interested in maintaining any aspect of helpful input to any matter I write about.


the ignore button option that came about in forums recently can really help folks maintain TOS agreements.


in this thread we simply want to know if fish in cycling harms fish, a case (es) have been made it doesn’t, and that disease delayed is the real harm. This is a core, inoffensive concept to investigate.


we have seneye measures confirmed in this thread, during fish in cycles, those posts came from the helpful crew i wish JDA would join. He sure has access to lots of different digital nh3 equipment I would sure enjoy seeing applied to any aspect of this matter.

 

[Cell]

You can disagree and debate stuff, but he seems very angry and spiteful, like all this is personal or something.

 

[jda]

Prove that somebody hurt me and I am not just adverse to people who reef off the work of others and the internet with no real experience and are in it for themselves. Work threads only please. Bounty is unclaimed.

In all honesty, these threads hurt the people new to the hobby, so they at least need to know if they want to listen to a charlatan. They have to be told often since they come around often and don't have the history that all of the rest of us do. If they want to, then cool. Too many upset to find out later that they were duped by somebody who had no real experience. I have almost thirty years of build threads and he has links. Believe who you want. If anybody has been around for a while, you can tell what is what from the people who like my posts versus his - there is a demarcation of experience and success there.

 

[brandon429]

I was pretty harsh in response to him last three threads he began the attacks on, so it’s understandable why he’s getting even now.

wish mods had a button that permanently ignored two different users, set externally, where they could not read nor communicate in each other’s works. You don’t see me popping into any of his posts to detail them, I’m only in this to find out which rules we’ve made for ourselves procedurally are correct or if they’re fear fad claims.

I call JDA and me even now, i harshed him last three attacks, he began a new one here, going forward I’ll expect him to steer clear of my posts unless he has specific measures to relay…most of my posts involve measuring ammonia in one way or another.


imagine posting a detraction to this thread that says: regarding fish in cycle + harm, I’ve been studying the matter and I disagree. Here’s fifteen non-successful fish + bottle bac cycles I collected showing both active symptoms in the fish for ammonia poisoning + some hach meter data to support it.


I would then get out my pen pad, take notes, and heartily thank whoever posted such sincere work for forwarding cycling science. We could be disagreeing in that way


thank you Cell.

 

[brandon429]

JDA you're officially reported, you will stay out of my posts going further on the site or we'll have TOS issues, that's for sure.

Select ignore, never post in my threads again JDA


@revhtree I've sent your management team several requests about JDA's badgering in my work threads, requesting nicely to make the separation occur.

here's the TOS caption from the recent attack

" if they want to listen to a charlatan. They have to be"

@Peace River requesting block from any future posts by JDA. JDA was the recurring problem in my 2ppm cycling thread you closed, when he shows up to begin a war it's my work threads that get closed, we could stop this process with redirection. It is directly outside of terms of service to write the word charlatan in response to someone reviewing ammonia trending posts. To do so without posting actual ammonia trending data is why I'm requesting the block; if there were counter measures found and provided I wouldn't mind the personal insult.

 

[jda]

If anybody new is reading this, brandon has been told many time that ammonia and fish is bad, has been shown studies by actual scientists how it is, has also been told by many experienced hobbyists and even some pros that his lack of experience does has led him to believe that his causality is not well founded, his correlations are wrong and that most of what he takes credit for that works would have happened anyway. This has happened numerous times.

These people have always been discounted as trolls and haters and ignored while all the time asking for the same things that he has discounted and ignored in the past.

Example? WWM has been suggested to him MANY times to read actual cycle activity and help from real professionals. Ignored... narrative is not what he likes, but I guess that all of those published and peer reviewed people are morons, trolls and haters as well.

BTW - it is not just me. It is just me today. Others have been in and out of this, as well. Wait a few days, see who likes my posts. Go and check out some of their build threads, as well as mine... check out his. You can see who knows what and who has done what.

 

[92Miata]

Prove that somebody hurt me and I am not just adverse to people who reef off the work of others and the internet with no real experience and are in it for themselves. Work threads only please. Bounty is unclaimed.

In all honesty, these threads hurt the people new to the hobby, so they at least need to know if they want to listen to a charlatan. They have to be told often since they come around often and don't have the history that all of the rest of us do. If they want to, then cool. Too many upset to find out later that they were duped by somebody who had no real experience. I have almost thirty years of build threads and he has links. Believe who you want. If anybody has been around for a while, you can tell what is what from the people who like my posts versus his - there is a demarcation of experience and success there.

What is your actual claim here? That bottled bacteria doesn't work?

You seem like a whole bunch of vitriol with no actual substance in this thread.

 

[HomebroodExotics]

What is your actual claim here? That bottled bacteria doesn't work?

You seem like a whole bunch of vitriol with no actual substance in this thread.

I think what He means that it might work, might not. The tank will cycle either way regardless and ignoring any amount of ammonia in your reef tank because the fish seem fine is not exactly best practice. Might not cause any problems but to just pretend like it’s normal is questionable. The proof that’s being asked for doesn’t exist and neither does the proof that ammonia in the reef is safe for it. Not that I’m aware anyway. But some people call copy and pasting links to a bunch of build threads as proof which is not really.

 

[brandon429]

There are actual ammonia readings from seneye in this thread, for some people it’s easier to pile on a bandwagon and shortchange reading, analysis and thought. Getting any sort of measure from critics is like trying to extract teeth without anesthesia. You can even start with an nh4 reading from api during any fish in cycle, if you want to start low grade effort it’ll surpass the last few disagreements in quality.


use ammonia measurements from anything you’ve seen or made yourself to make a point. I have several friends with seneyes who will respond to me with any test I’d like to see, and I’m thankful they’re saving me $190 in having to buy the meter myself.


don’t like seneye? Get Hach. The one fella on this entire board with access to a a Hach meter, some bottle bac, and a fish-in cycle tank happens to be the meanest most vitriol filled writer on the board, call me lucky.


again Ill state, anyone who disagrees needs to lead with some measures, we have more than one actual measure of digital ammonia during a fish in cycle, respond in kind.

the non measure back and forth from trolls who aren’t here to provide counter measure is the actual problem.


I welcome and want disagreement, that’s what hones method.


no matter what we post to detractors, they simply disagree without measure. I could get you more data now on seneye cycles and day one ammonia control rates, but you’d just claim seneye is no good.


the claim is that fish in cycling harms fish, I’m seeing no data for that, and data to the opposite of that in works here.

 

[brandon429]

Peace River


Im asking you ahead of time, please don’t close my work thread it’s over a year old.

Check Homebrood’s and JDA’s entire post history with me, you’ll see why they are here posting without contributing measure, or personal observation etc. they use baseless personal attacks as the cold open, every interaction.


if they’re going to attempt to derail, we want to get it back on track without closing a thread that inspects the #1 cycling method used in the world: dump in some bottle bac and go.

if they’re going to be allowed to pile on attacks from previous posts, it‘ll take a few exchanges to convince them to change focus into providing measures that support their claims of ammonia noncontrol in bottle cycles.

 

[jda]

I have no real opinion on bottled bacteria. There is no real proof that it does anything, but also none that it hurts anything either. I am mostly of the opinion that if people want to use it, then cool... At best, or worst, it is a tool that needs to be used in conjunction with a lot of other tools to achieve a goal. It does not need to be used, so nobody can say that it is a necessary too. It is just a tool.

My main issue is that the people who need this help need the help, obviously right... and it needs to come from people who know what they are talking about. Elevated ammonia does hurt fish, even if they live - this is a known fact of science. Asking to prove that it does not is rubbish. There are plenty of tanks that started with fish and bottled bacteria that have killed fish, and also plenty that have not. The same is true about tanks that uses fish gut bacteria for the cycle, or a shrimp (which I never understood), or live rock or whatever... The nuance and details matter too much to just ignore what you don't like and treat what you do like as a fact. If you keep the ammonia low, through whatever method, then you are going to be fine and the tank is going to cycle anyway - nobody needs to take credit for this. If you don't then you are going to have problems, even if a fish lives.

Dude has consistently refused to accept any real science that has been presented and has discounted failures that are dismissed as haters and trolls. This is not helpful to the people who need our help most. This is why I want them to understand that if they choose to follow his advice, what he is offering was against the advice of actual, real hobbyists that have done this (failures and successes), actual authors that have been peer reviewed (to some extent), pHd's in the field and also with choices to discount or try and silence those who say otherwise. You can cruise back through the beginning of his existence and see what people have linked, offered, etc. and it is all discounted as meaningless for whatever (the target has moved over time, but the current one is a seneye). The common denominator is somebody who is in this for some other reason than to actually help people.

 

[Cell]

Prove that somebody hurt me and I am not just adverse to people who reef off the work of others and the internet with no real experience and are in it for themselves. Work threads only please. Bounty is unclaimed.

In all honesty, these threads hurt the people new to the hobby, so they at least need to know if they want to listen to a charlatan. They have to be told often since they come around often and don't have the history that all of the rest of us do. If they want to, then cool. Too many upset to find out later that they were duped by somebody who had no real experience. I have almost thirty years of build threads and he has links. Believe who you want. If anybody has been around for a while, you can tell what is what from the people who like my posts versus his - there is a demarcation of experience and success there.

If you truly believe these threads hurt the hobby, I'd hate to hear how you feel about the average LFS' cycling advice. Surely Brandon must have a lengthy list of victims who he's given out bad advice to and killed their livestock. There must be mountains of evidence of bad advice given over the years resulting in dead fish. Right?

The reality is that the opposite is true. He has a long list of reefers that he has personally helped and are grateful for his time and insight.

At some point you can just agree to disagree and easily avoid his threads...

 

[92Miata]

I think what He means that it might work, might not. The tank will cycle either way regardless and ignoring any amount of ammonia in your reef tank because the fish seem fine is not exactly best practice. Might not cause any problems but to just pretend like it’s normal is questionable. The proof that’s being asked for doesn’t exist and neither does the proof that ammonia in the reef is safe for it. Not that I’m aware anyway. But some people call copy and pasting links to a bunch of build threads as proof which is not really.

Literally no one is making the claim that ammonia is safe for fish.

Can we please have a discussion about the claims that are actually being made?