Q for everyone are you FOR or AGAINST QT

[N.Sreefer]

The question shouldn't be about if you are "for" or "against" QT, or even if you believe it works. There is no debate on whether or not QT works, hundreds of years of general scientific knowledge and principles confirms that if you properly quarantine a fish that came thru a shipping channel riddled with parasites and diseases your chances of introducing a deadly pathogen to your existing system go down dramatically.

The question should be:

Do you care enough about the animals you are keeping to go thru the trouble of educating yourself on proper quarantine processes if you plan to not limit yourself on where you source your animals from OR are you willing to only source animals from captive breeders or from a dealer that has a satisfactory quarantine process which will likely cost more?

There are *for sure* people that haven't quarantined and haven't had any major losses, some even over many years, but that should not be construed as evidence that QT is not needed.

There is debate to be had on both sides. I'll play devils advocate for a moment. Its hundreds of years of scientific knowledge on the QT of humans and livestock (mammals) the first public aquarium opened in may of 1853 and they certainly didn't have coral or qt the fish. So we don't have hundreds of years research with captive care of fish let alone QT on them. These fish spend their whole lives swimming in parasites ever see an analysis of the number of parasites in seawater? Why is it that when they're put in much more sterile conditions that we find it prudent to medicate them? The stress from shipping sure but how often is an aquarist buying a freshly imported fish? Theres a chain of custody before reaching the point of sale. If a fish is immunocompromised due to stress from shipping why in the world would we expose them to further stress with medication and an unnatural environment like a qt with no rockwork?

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

There is debate to be had on both sides. I'll play devils advocate for a moment. Its hundreds of years of scientific knowledge on the QT of humans and livestock (mammals) the first public aquarium opened in may of 1853 and they certainly didn't have coral or qt the fish. So we don't have hundreds of years research with captive care of fish let alone QT on them. These fish spend their whole lives swimming in parasites ever see an analysis of the number of parasites in seawater? Why is it that when they're put in much more sterile conditions that we find it prudent to medicate them? The stress from shipping sure but how often is an aquarist buying a freshly imported fish? Theres a chain of custody before reaching the point of sale. If a fish is immunocompromised due to stress from shipping why in the world would we expose them to further stress with medication and an unnatural environment like a qt with no rockwork?

You're not debating what I actually said. Read it again (Seriously, PLEASE read it. I'm not trying to be rude, I just took a lot of time to carefully write this stuff and it seems like nobody ever actually READS what I write *sheesh* XD ):

if you properly quarantine a fish that came thru a shipping channel riddled with parasites and diseases your chances of introducing a deadly pathogen to your existing system go down dramatically

I did NOT say if you don't QT everything will die.

So, your questions... if you really want to know, I'm sure the answer is out there for at least some of these. I'm not an expert, @Jay Hemdal is and HumbleFish and Felicia McCaulley from Biota and I have never heard ANY of them say QT was a waste of time.

Q. These fish spend their whole lives swimming in parasites ever see an analysis of the number of parasites in seawater?
A. You would have to ask a scientist this (the people with all that scientific knowledge and principles I alluded to). My guess is (depending on the parasite, but I believe this applies to most of them) these parasites are diluted in billions of gallons of water in the ocean, compared to your tank which is considerably smaller, and a parasite like ich will be problem in your tank, but not in the ocean (in general)

Q. Why is it that when they're put in much more sterile conditions that we find it prudent to medicate them?
A. I don't know, you'd have to ask one of the experts or go find the answer yourself. My guess would be: if you put an infected fish in a "sterile" environment (its not actually sterile) the fish is still infected and should be medicated (assuming it is infected).

Q. The stress from shipping sure but how often is an aquarist buying a freshly imported fish?
A. Again, the statement I made was about IF you care about the health of your animals, and you choose to NOT specifically look for fish that are not coming thru those main shipping channels, so it applies specifically to that.

Q. (more of a statement) Theres a chain of custody before reaching the point of sale.
A. So what? It depends on the chain, doesn't it? Some parts of that chain just plumb a bunch of tanks together and the parasites spread to other fish and you end up with an infected fish.

Q. If a fish is immunocompromised due to stress from shipping why in the world would we expose them to further stress with medication and an unnatural environment like a qt with no rockwork?
A. So this goes back to my statement that you should do the research and educate yourself on the proper quarantine process. I did not say you just medicate without seeing any symptoms, and I have seen people say both sides of that. There is literally no debate that IF you bring home a diseased fish and put it in a QT away from your DT... even if you do nothing else, no medication or anything and the fish dies in QT, you did not introduce a deadly pathogen to your existing system. Also, putting an immunocompromised fish in your DT can be even worse. The stress of being bullied as the newcomer (and being sick) could not only kill the fish, but puts the rest of your fish at risk. Objectively speaking, the prevailing wisdom just in general is that if you bring home a brand new fish, it is way easier on the fish if it is in a tank on its own with little or no lights. It helps calm them down, and they wont get bullied by any tank mates because there aren't any.

 

[HuduVudu]

@flourishofmediocrity @N.Sreefer was playing devils advocate.

I am not sure why you are so upset at him. What he said was to instigate debate and elucidation of views. It wasn't a gauntlet challenge.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

Then what is? For you is there anything that would convince you otherwise?

Asking for a friend.

I'm not sure if you are joking or not. Also not sure if you read everything I wrote.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

@flourishofmediocrity @N.Sreefer was playing devils advocate.

I am not sure why you are so upset at him. What he said was to instigate debate and elucidation of views. It wasn't a gauntlet challenge.

Again, if you actually read what I wrote:

if you properly quarantine a fish that came thru a shipping channel riddled with parasites and diseases your chances of introducing a deadly pathogen to your existing system go down dramatically

Do you really believe that the above statement is debatable?

 

[N.Sreefer]

Again, if you actually read what I wrote:

if you properly quarantine a fish that came thru a shipping channel riddled with parasites and diseases your chances of introducing a deadly pathogen to your existing system go down dramatically

Do you really believe that the above statement is debatable?

I believe its you who didn't read what I wrote. I was simply stating there's two sides to every coin and everything is debatable. My background is in science (no not marine biology) and that's why I seek these kind of discussions if nothing is questioned, nothing is learned. Confirmation bias has been discussed in a few of these threads, I believe you taking this subject personally has something to do with that. I do believe that statement to be debatable, if people didn't question that which is common knowledge we would all still think the world is flat. I said earlier in this thread I am undecided I was making theoretical counterpoints not saying what I personally believe.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

I believe its you who didn't read what I wrote. I was simply stating there's two sides to every coin and everything is debatable. My background is in science (no not marine biology) and that's why I seek these kind of discussions if nothing is questioned, nothing is learned. Confirmation bias has been discussed in a few of these threads, I believe you taking this subject personally has something to do with that. I do believe that statement to be debatable, if people didn't question that which is common knowledge we would all still think the world is flat. I said earlier in this thread I am undecided I was making theoretical counterpoints not saying what I personally believe.

The only thing I'm saying that I don't believe is up for debate is the efficacy of QT itself, and the statement I very carefully crafted highlights that specifically. Quarantine works whether it is humans, mammals, fish, whatever.

What you should be asking is:

Do you care enough about the animals you are keeping to prevent the potential spread of pathogens that could kill them?

 

[N.Sreefer]

The only thing I'm saying that I don't believe is up for debate is the efficacy of QT itself, and the statement I very carefully crafted highlights that specifically. Quarantine works whether it is humans, mammals, fish, whatever.

What you should be asking is:

Do you care enough about the animals you are keeping to prevent the potential spread of pathogens that could kill them?

I have to see alot more study done before I'm convinced, I believe that to be debatable also. I have yet to see one study on the effects of antibiotics or other commonly used medication on fish microbiota and how this effects digestion. I would also like to see (with a large study group) what happens with fish placed in an established environment v a qt like environment (no rock algae or microfauna) and how this effects survival. I would also like to see a base survival rate (once recieved in country) established of how many fish will die one way or another. If you buy a fish that was cyanide captured it'll die in either situation skewing results without a proper control group. At one point drs thought giving everyone antibiotics for every sniffle was a good idea and that led to resistant strains. Looking at this objectively, I can see resistant strains of common fish pathogens coming into existence in the near future.

 

[Jubei2006]

When discussing our tanks and the ocean and parasite burden. Remember the medical adage, the solution to pollution is dilution. Our tanks are infinitely smaller in size and flow, and can easily concentrate pathogens and toxins to levels not seen in the ocean. It's enough to overwhelm any fishes immune system. I would also venture to say that novice hobbyists will likely quit as soon as their tank is wiped out by velvet and ich.

 

[Karen00]

I'm for it but am trying to find a place for a QT. I barely have enough room for my 5g.

 

[HuduVudu]

Again, if you actually read what I wrote:

if you properly quarantine a fish that came thru a shipping channel riddled with parasites and diseases your chances of introducing a deadly pathogen to your existing system go down dramatically

Do you really believe that the above statement is debatable?

I think everything is debatable for what that's worth.

I think getting angry and entrenching yourself into a narrow view, is a recipe for disaster.

 

[HuduVudu]

I'm not sure if you are joking or not. Also not sure if you read everything I wrote.

To point a finer point on it. I read everything.

No I am not joking, No I am not your enemy. No I am not going to fight you.

I was asking a question similar to another thread. I would like an answer, but if you don't feel comfortable with that I can understand.

 

[Nemo&Friends]

I have never quarantine and I have not lost fish to disease. I am not against an observation Q, but not convinced that medicating as prevention is a good idea. I will probably never do it. I might observe.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

I think everything is debatable for what that's worth.

I think getting angry and entrenching yourself into a narrow view, is a recipe for disaster.

Fair enough, if you want to debate against the science of quarantining, have at it, it's been around since the 14th century and is still used today to prevent the spread of pathogens.

Just to be clear, it is your assertion that imposing an isolation period for a fish will prevent the spread of infectious or contagious disease is up for debate?

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

To point a finer point on it. I read everything.

No I am not joking, No I am not your enemy. No I am not going to fight you.

I was asking a question similar to another thread. I would like an answer, but if you don't feel comfortable with that I can understand.

Fair enough, I apologize for suggesting you didn't read what I wrote. The only other possibility was that you are actually trying to make an argument that QT just doesn't work at all which I did not think was a possibility. But looking back now on how this interaction has gone, I guess I should have expected that.

 

[happyhourhero]

I wish you had a “for it but don’t do it” section. Lol

 

[Jay Hemdal]

Have you ever seen this clear on it's own?

Does it cause pop-eye?
If it is advanced, is that what causes the cloudy eye or cloudy and bulging?

I assume what you mean on the FW dip is that the nasties fall off and then you can see them?

I’ve never had it go away on its own, but in really large systems (100,000 gallons+?) with really good water flow, it can become a chronic issue that the fish can live with. There is some evidence the fish can develop partial immunity. In smaller systems, it usually ends with fish loss.
I’ve seen minor Popeye with it, but usually it’s just a gray congested cloudiness.
Sorry, yes- using a FW dip as a diagnostic tool for them.
Jay

 

[Paul B]

Just to be clear, it is your assertion that imposing an isolation period for a fish will prevent the spread of infectious or contagious disease is up for debate?

I think most people agree that quarantine may keep parasites out of your system. But I do not believe that is helpful and actually believe it is very harmful in the long run which is why there are no fully quarantined systems that are very old with fish spawning and dying of only old age.

In those systems where fish are quarantined for extended times, fish lose immunity gradually the longer fish are not exposed to pathogens and if a fish never encounters a parasite, it will have no immunity. In such a tank, in the future parasites will eventually be introduced and the fish, having no immunity will have to differ to using meds and that will lead to lesser immunity and more meds.

Just my opinion of course.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

I think most people agree that quarantine may keep parasites out of your system. But I do not believe that is helpful and actually believe it is very harmful in the long run which is why there are no fully quarantined systems that are very old with fish spawning and dying of only old age.

In those systems where fish are quarantined for extended times, fish lose immunity gradually the longer fish are not exposed to pathogens and if a fish never encounters a parasite, it will have no immunity. In such a tank, in the future parasites will eventually be introduced and the fish, having no immunity will have to differ to using meds and that will lead to lesser immunity and more meds.

Just my opinion of course.

This seems like a reasonable position to me, although I would be interested to see if there is any actual research that backs up the lowered immunity claim. Not that I don't believe you, but that would give an idea of the over/under to that approach. I have also heard this argument elsewhere (but it was about corals, not fish) and that it may actually promote growth in some corals as a reaction to parasites. I don't know if I think that would be a good argument for fish though.

The counter point to this though, is that IF you just accept the parasites and have fish that are susceptible to them under a stress event, then its just a matter of time before something happens like your heater breaks, and then there's an outbreak.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

This seems like a reasonable position to me, although I would be interested to see if there is any actual research that backs up the lowered immunity claim. Not that I don't believe you, but that would give an idea of the over/under to that approach. I have also heard this argument elsewhere (but it was about corals, not fish) and that it may actually promote growth in some corals as a reaction to parasites. I don't know if I think that would be a good argument for fish though.

The counter point to this though, is that IF you just accept the parasites and have fish that are susceptible to them under a stress event, then its just a matter of time before something happens like your heater breaks, and then there's an outbreak.

I don’t see that in my systems. IMO innate immunity can only go so far, and then medication is required.
Jay