Pressure on False Claim Products

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I see Amazon is still selling Vibrant. That's one that's clearly not what it says it is. At least it's not on BRS.

Yes, seeing an ingredient list apparently does not always mean those are the ingredients.

 

[JayM]

lol

You know, that would not surprise me. Maybe someone with current access to Chat GPT can ask it if hydroxide boosts alkalinity in seawater.

Not the latest version of ChatGPT, but even AI seems to know that ALK can increase.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I don’t think you can ever stop a company from stating things like “accelerates coral growth” or “brightens colors”. Those have almost certainly been “tested” and under a particular set of conditions it probably did as it said. While this makes the statement true I don’t think it necessarily guarantees it will work in another tank with different conditions.

I don't personally assume that all companies test such claims, but these sorts of generic claims are also impossible to prove wrong with testing since as you note, there can always be some scenario where they might work, even if that is only in 50% or 10% or 0.001% of reef aquaria.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

The product is marketed for salt and fresh - thus my question

A number of companies sell products for both salt and fresh, and when making claims, rarely (and perhaps too conveniently) do they distinguish the two scenarios despite them sometimes having different results.

Chemipure by Boyd is a case in point, but even ignoring the lack of fresh vs salt distinction for the effects of things like their ion exchange resin in chemipure blue, they make other unbelievably stupid claims:

https://chemi-pure.com/products/chemipure/
"Chemi-pure does not remove trace elements and is the only filter medium which aids in the natural balance of positive and negative charges, with an emphasis on the beneficial negative ion. "

"REMOVES TOXIC ELEMENTS – Including Copper & Phenol"

So copper is removed, or not?
Seriously? We need to work to attain charge balance? Did they forget that nature already provides charge balance? The beneficial negative ion? which one is that? Do tell. lol

https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshe...uilibrium/02_Text/04_Mass_and_Charge_Balances
"This equation is known as a charge balance. It is important to realize that all solutions must be electrically neutral; that is, for every substance of positive charge there must be an equivalent amount of negative charge to balance it out. If something dissolves in water and produces positive ions, then there must be negative ions around to balance them out."

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Following up on Chemipure, I sent this request to their online support:

I have a question about one of your products, the standard chemipure.

You mention on your web site that it removes copper. You also mention that it does not remove trace elements. I thought copper was a trace element, so I'm a little confused.

In a marine aquarium, should I expect chemipure to remove copper?

Thanks in advance
Randy

 

[jda]

Everybody know that I have mucho time for all of this - these things can cause damage to some reefs directly by not working and indirectly by consuming money that could be spent elsewhere to better husbandry.

The only thing that I can think of that works is to start a one-page sticky with a list of known-issue products with links to their discussion threads. Have as many people as possible write to the vendors that sell these products and let them know that they will not be supporting that website until they remove all of these products for sale. The outrage on message boards about Vibrant did not stop reefing supply companies from selling it, it was the customers who wrote and called that did.

The hope would be that nobody wants to show up on that list. Those that are on the list would want to get off of it.

 

[jda]

A smart guy with a lot of experience whom I trust once wrote:

None of these aquarium companies have real labs - they just skim the literature for ideas.

Edit: since Aquarium Systems and Marineland closed their small labs.

Jay

This is spot on, IMO. Anybody who thinks otherwise should change their calculations. I had TM or some other EU company get quite mad when I posted this and they said that they do a lot of research and calculations, but still did not give any evidence that they had a lab where they checked anything out.

 

[DCR]

Investing in an actual lab just for reef tank work would be prohibitively expensive. I cannot imagine any reefing company doing that. I even question if they own and operate their own ICP equipment or contract that out as well. At best they might contract with other lab services for any testing they might do for research.

 

[GlassMunky]

Investing in an actual lab just for reef tank work would be prohibitively expensive. I cannot imagine any reefing company doing that. I even question if they own and operate their own ICP equipment or contract that out as well. At best they might contract with other lab services for any testing they might do for research.

an ICP-OES machine itself isnt that expensive, its like a high end car price, or less depending on how HIGH end the car is. the machines are less than $100,000

 

[SteveMM62Reef]

How about Bacteria in a Bottle or Live Sand with no expiration date! No storage or transporting recommendation!

 

[jda]

Most of the things pointed out here are Chemistry 101. They are beyond contestation. The companies are either incompetent or outright engaged in fraud.

 

[Nonya]

Investing in an actual lab just for reef tank work would be prohibitively expensive. I cannot imagine any reefing company doing that. I even question if they own and operate their own ICP equipment or contract that out as well. At best they might contract with other lab services for any testing they might do for research.

If they're not expected to actually test their products, then it's not ok to make unsubstantiated claims.

 

[workhz]

If they're not expected to actually test their products, then it's not ok to make unsubstantiated claims.

I think they can do whatever they want, you are also free to sue them either directly or part of a class action should so choose. At least that's my understanding of it but sometimes that's pretty close to a coin flip w/r/t my understanding.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I think they can do whatever they want, you are also free to sue them either directly or part of a class action should so choose. At least that's my understanding of it but sometimes that's pretty close to a coin flip w/r/t my understanding.

But not on your own. The FTC will bring the suit if you can convince them it is false advertising.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising

 

[jda]

I think they can do whatever they want, you are also free to sue them either directly or part of a class action should so choose. At least that's my understanding of it but sometimes that's pretty close to a coin flip w/r/t my understanding.

There are laws that companies have to follow in both the US and EU - not sure about other places. Without these, soda companies could claim that their drinks cure cancer or some crazy stuff. It amazes me that folks probably would have outrage if a Cola Company said that their drink cured cancer, but they are OK with a reefing company claiming that their XYZ product did ABC to their tank without any evidence when it was just along for the ride when a tank matured a bit.

BTW - most of my outrage is when companies don't label controlled products correctly. I did extensive research around this and you DO NOT need an Rx to supply or give controlled substances to ornamental fish - not to be confused with fish used in food supply chains.

Companies that sell things like antibiotics, algaecides, fungicides, etc. MUST label the exact ingredients and the amounts to be legal in both the US and the EU. Instructions are supposed to follow with dosage amounts, etc. Selling is then OK. Some companies label their ingredients well - the well known case of API actually identifying the Quat in their algaecide and UWC not doing so in Vibrant.

My ire is twofold - first, companies can get fined and people can go do to jail for this. I own a small business and I don't want to see anybody suffer if they just did not know. This is help for them, should they choose to accept it, IMO. My other disgust is from the few that want to commit fraud - you have to stamp these out so that others do not want to follow in their footsteps.

 

[Spare time]

How about Bacteria in a Bottle or Live Sand with no expiration date! No storage or transporting recommendation!

Theres actually a thread with data on those that shows some of them work for cycling and some don't

 

[Spare time]

lol

You know, that would not surprise me. Maybe someone with current access to Chat GPT can ask it if hydroxide boosts alkalinity in seawater.

Here is Chat GPT's response

Yes, hydroxide ions (OH-) can contribute to an increase in alkalinity in seawater. Alkalinity is a measure of the water's ability to resist changes in pH, and it is mainly influenced by the presence of carbonate (CO3^2-) and bicarbonate (HCO3-) ions.
When hydroxide ions (OH-) are added to seawater, they can react with dissolved carbon dioxide (CO2) to form bicarbonate ions:
OH−+CO2→HCO3−OH−+CO2→HCO3−
This reaction contributes to the overall alkalinity of the water. The carbonate and bicarbonate ions act as buffering agents, helping to stabilize the pH of the seawater.
It's important to note that alkalinity in seawater is a complex interplay of various chemical equilibria involving carbon dioxide, carbonate, bicarbonate, and other ions. Changes in these components can affect the pH and overall chemistry of seawater.

 

[MnFish1]

If they're not expected to actually test their products, then it's not ok to make unsubstantiated claims.

I would assume that companies that do any actual chemistry research on their products contract it out to other laboratories. I do not know the percentage of companies that do or don't.

 

[MnFish1]

How about Bacteria in a Bottle or Live Sand with no expiration date! No storage or transporting recommendation!

First many bacteria in a bottle contain spores of bacteria, that can last indefinitely (these are more that likely heterotrophs, as compared to obligate autotrophs). As @Spare time mentioned there have been at least a couple experiments that are posted on R2R that show which ones seem to work, what tank conditions are required, and there is a discussion of the expiration date issue.

 

[MnFish1]

A number of companies sell products for both salt and fresh, and when making claims, rarely (and perhaps too conveniently) do they distinguish the two scenarios despite them sometimes having different results.

Chemipure by Boyd is a case in point, but even ignoring the lack of fresh vs salt distinction for the effects of things like their ion exchange resin in chemipure blue, they make other unbelievably stupid claims:

Did you ever get an answer from Boyd? I have always used chemipure blue as a marine formulation or high ph freshwater tank and plain chemipure as a freshwater product. As to the trace elements - my guess is they are trying to say they will remove toxic levels of copper (i.e. after a treatment) - but implying that low trace-levels of copper will not be. They also claim that fish live 3-4x longer in treated tanks... So I guess I take everything companies say with a 'grain of salt':)