Red Sea Comparison of various methods for Nitrate and Phosphate Reduction Chart

[Daniel@R2R]

I've seen many records of people dosing as well and just as many arguments as to why one method is better than the other. I myself have tried many methods, nopox won that debate for me in my tank.
In my experiences, the stories about a method are just stories, until you use it in your tank(because of the multitudes of different setups), you cannot have a full understanding, therefore, you cannot make any logical judgments and blanket statements if it's the same as other methodologies or does not work. To attempt to do so is troll territory..

Ok...I gotta say that this statement (and several others in this thread) strike me as very odd coming from you. Aren't you the same guy who shot down Bayer as a legit dip even though it works in LOTS of people??? How now do you argue for superiority of a product based on "I've seen the positive effects" when you won't tolerate others who say "I haven't seen negative effects." How do you go about calling people out for using one product based on anecdotal evidence and then flip on that argument to do exactly what you accuse others of doing...?

Also, I'm not sure what it is that has you so upset in this thread. Randy said that certain claims by Red Sea don't make sense, and so he questions their claims that are being used in their marketing materials. That's the extent of his argument to my knowledge. He has even said that NoPoX has likely yielded positive results for many hobbyists. I think he is questioning the scientific data that Red Sea is using to make negative claims about other methods...which doesn't amount to a criticism per se of NoPoX, but rather of the claims made to exalt above other methods. ...so I'm not sure why you feel that just because he won't concede to your opinion that he is somehow trolling??? (I call ad hominem on that one...) He is requiring a standard of scientific evidence...something you advocate very strongly for in another thread, but here you seem to be throwing that to the wind...I'm starting to think you just like to argue...or you're a huge Red Sea fan.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Ok...I gotta say that this statement (and several others in this thread) strike me as very odd coming from you. Aren't you the same guy who shot down Bayer as a legit dip even though it works in LOTS of people??? How now do you argue for superiority of a product based on "I've seen the positive effects" when you won't tolerate others who say "I haven't seen negative effects." How do you go about calling people out for using one product based on anecdotal evidence and then flip on that argument to do exactly what you accuse others of doing...?

Also, I'm not sure what it is that has you so upset in this thread. Randy said that certain claims by Red Sea don't make sense, and so he questions their claims that are being used in their marketing materials. That's the extent of his argument to my knowledge. He has even said that NoPoX has likely yielded positive results for many hobbyists. I think he is questioning the scientific data that Red Sea is using to make negative claims about other methods...which doesn't amount to a criticism per se of NoPoX, but rather of the claims made to exalt above other methods. ...so I'm not sure why you feel that just because he won't concede to your opinion that he is somehow trolling??? (I call ad hominem on that one...) He is requiring a standard of scientific evidence...something you advocate very strongly for in another thread, but here you seem to be throwing that to the wind...I'm starting to think you just like to argue...or you're a huge Red Sea fan.

Let me put it this way. I'm a skeptic. But all I've seen from him is him saying it's no different than vinegar or vodka. And he constantly shoots down their answers because it all pivots from the proprietary ingredients tangent, which is entirely possible, but when people can't find out others "secrets" they discount it as a lie, a tactic of someone who is sour for not thinking of it first imo. But I see the ingredients are different, and the company says they add a few other elements to assist in other bacterial functions.
The working knowledge we have of carbon dosing and how it works, supports the arguments of "it works".
The lack of knowledge as to WHAT'S IN nopox in it's entirety leaves a gray area.
The assumption it's the same as vodka and vinegar shows ignorance, as even on the bottle it says "contains methanol".
You have a few good points, but in long threads like this, especially with lack of evidence as to what's in the solution(nopox) leads to a dead end argument where you can't prove it, and neither can I.
So please come down from your high-horse and realize this.

Just as he says " I think of your experience as one of many that, averaged together, do not show NOPOX to be clearly better or worse than other organic dosing products." I can say about the nay-sayers, "I think your experience and lack of knowledge as to what is in nopox, averaged together, shows that you do not fully have an argument in favor of what you state, as the lack of "differences" between nopox and other carbon sources efficiencies."

It's a merry-go-round of ignorance on all of our parts.
If you believe you have a point to make, please do contact customer service, they are the source of knowledge, not me.
So please do not be so arrogant as to drag me through the coals over supporting a GOOD experience.

I listened to people like you for years and did nothing but have problems with my tank. Then I listened to a corporation and had nothing but success with my tank.(I hate that truth, but it's a fact)
Whether that was a problem with execution of instructions, or something else I overlooked, that does NOT fall under the scenario of "I've seen no negative effects" in the ways I talk about in the other thread and you know it. I have also posted the facts aside from my own observations to back that up. And it was discounted, but not disproved. I also take more stock in a team of phd's that are familiar with marine biology than a pharmaceutical chemist who has an aquarium hobby. So yes, HERE is the basis for many things in which I believe it does not at all qualify under my other thread that combats the statement "I've not seen any negative effects". You try to use my words against me, but you choose to not pay attention to ALL my words, that's on you. (here it is again for reference, feel free to research the particular areas they touch on. http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2094884&page=1)
And if you attempt to censor me so others cannot see what I'm talking about, google reef central, where science meets the hobby by the chief red sea scientist.

That's a funny thing too I find, that "where science meets the hobby" article on the other forum is a huge tangent as to the evidence as to WHY nopox is different, and what does the opposition hide behind? "Sorry, you can't post links to other forums".
OOOOOOOH how convenient!!

Again, I'm happy with it and I'm sharing it, and I get told there's no difference.(that's super rude if you don't have any facts, THAT'S the major problem I have with this situation) Red Sea is just a name to me, I hold no loyalty, but they seem to have more scientific evidence than many people on the forums, and it seems to be working much better than the experiences I had with vinegar or vodka alone.

I find other than the subject matter being questioned, there needs to be more focus on the sources of information. A single individual who has a degree, or a team of individuals who have degrees.
I'm sorry, but no single human is that smart. That's a truth that has held through the years. Don't believe it? Read some books. No matter the individual, they rely on other information formulated by someone else, ALWAYS.

I really hate arguing about anything, but I do take offense to being told my opinion or experience does not matter, and I will show my teeth. Because we could be talking about almost anything, and I will always lean towards the group of scientists over a single scientist, UNLESS they can disprove it through facts.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Yes, we do go round and round and I see no reason to continue to rebut the same arguments you put forth about secret ingredients making all the difference when no one but you and the company making money off it seems to notice a difference in its use in reef tanks.

Happy Reefing!

 

[abecker]

I find other than the subject matter being questioned, there needs to be more focus on the sources of information. A single individual who has a degree, or a team of individuals who have degrees.
I'm sorry, but no single human is that smart. That's a truth that has held through the years. Don't believe it? Read some books. No matter the individual, they rely on other information formulated by someone else, ALWAYS.

I really hate arguing about anything, but I do take offense to being told my opinion or experience does not matter, and I will show my teeth. Because we could be talking about almost anything, and I will always lean towards the group of scientists over a single scientist, UNLESS they can disprove it through facts.

I wouldn't look at Randy as one individual. If you look at some of his articles there are 10-15 references at the bottom where the information has come from. Also, one benefit I see with info from Randy is he isn't trying to make money off of it. He doesn't have a bias and therefore doesn't have a reason to word things to help/hurt his stance on anything.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

I wouldn't look at Randy as one individual. If you look at some of his articles there are 10-15 references at the bottom where the information has come from. Also, one benefit I see with info from Randy is he isn't trying to make money off of it. He doesn't have a bias and therefore doesn't have a reason to word things to help/hurt his stance on anything.

That you know of.
But don't forget anyone can write an article and link references, that doesn't mean the subject matter is true. (even in the case of Red Sea's article)
But the one difference?
Even now you see him refer to it as "secret ingredients" instead of "proprietary formulation". This suggests his opinion of the information is more of a trick, than legitimate info.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Yes, we do go round and round and I see no reason to continue to rebut the same arguments you put forth about secret ingredients making all the difference when no one but you and the company making money off it seems to notice a difference in its use in reef tanks.

And you can thank me now for editing your above post to remove a link that violates the terms of service and would cause an infraction for you since you acknowledge that it is against the rules and did it anyway. If you don't care for the link to Red Sea that I added, just ask and I will remove that.

Happy Reefing!

I wish I made money off of it. I find your reaction amusing.
It only reinforces the statement I made, about you just can't accept not knowing something and obviously if you don't know it, it can't be true.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

I believe this proves if he could figure it out, he would make money off of it.

Consultant

Holmes-Farley Consulting
February 2012 – Present (3 years 9 months)
Consulting in the areas of drug discovery, therapeutic polymers and biomaterials

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I wish I made money off of it. I find your reaction amusing.
It only reinforces the statement I made, about you just can't accept not knowing something and obviously if you don't know it, it can't be true.

I don't know why you are amused.

I was referring to the two groups that have claimed to have tested both vodka plus vinegar, and NOPOX, and find NOPOX to be clearly superior.

Those two sets of people are:

1. You
2. The people from Red Sea who sell NOPOX

I've never actually seen anyone else make that claim, but I have seen many people claim to have tested that combination or similar combinations and not seen a difference.

I'm certainly not trying to imply that you make money off it. If that was your interpretation, that was incorrect.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I believe this proves if he could figure it out, he would make money off of it.

Consultant

Holmes-Farley Consulting
February 2012 – Present (3 years 9 months)
Consulting in the areas of drug discovery, therapeutic polymers and biomaterials

That is such a ridiculous comment I hardly know what to say.

It does show that you have a pretty low threshold of "proof".

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

That you know of.

You are right. Outed at last.

Heinz pays me to claim that vinegar is as good as Red Sea NOPOX so they can boost sales.

If you look close at an article I published ten years ago, you'll find a picture of a Heinz vinegar bottle as an example of using vinegar to reduce pH.

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-03/rhf/index.htm

Was that when this whole ugly secret funding of Randy started? Inquiring minds want to know!

Go Heinz!




Seriously, for those readers who are true believers in conspiracy theories, lets me put your thoughts to ease (if that is possible). I have never made any money off of any product sold into the reef hobby. The recipes I provide, while used by companies to make money (like BRS, who kindly asked if I had any concerns about them selling the ingredients and referring to the recipe and using the recipe) do not result in any money for me. I have been asked on a number of different occasions if I had an interest in endorsing products and to date I have not done so. I do provide private and free advice to certain companies who have asked specific questions about potential products and devices (such as testing devices). I do get paid for the articles I write, although no magazine has ever suggested topics that relate to commercial products that the magazine gets money from. I have never accepted a free product for testing that resulted in an article about it (at least that I can recall). I have, at various times over the past 20 years, been paid by various online forums to answer questions.

 

[abecker]

You are right. Outed at last.

Heinz pays me to claim that vinegar is a good as Red Sea NOPOX so they can boost sales.

If you look close to an article I published ten years ago, you'll find a picture of a Heinz vinegar bottle as an example of using vinegar to reduce pH.

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-03/rhf/index.htm

Was that when this whole ugly secret funding of Randy started? Inquiring minds want to know!

Go Heinz!




Seriously, for those readers who are true believers in conspiracy theories, lets me put your thoughts to ease (if that is possible). I have never made any money off of any product sold into the reef hobby. The recipes I provide, while used by companies to make money (like BRS, who kindly asked if I had any concerns about them selling the ingredients and referring to the recipe and using the recipe) do not result in any money for me. I have been asked on a number of different occasions if I had an interest in endorsing products and to date I have not done so. I do provide private and free advice to certain companies who have asked specific questions about potential products and devices (such as testing devices). I do get paid for the articles I write, although no magazine has ever suggested topics that relate to commercial products that the magazine gets money from. I have never accepted a free product for testing that resulted in an article about it (at least that I can recall). I have, at various times over the past 20 years, been paid by various online forums to answer questions.

HMM, but that doesn't explain the bottle of soda water in the picture above the vinegar...(sarcasm)

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Even now you see him refer to it as "secret ingredients" instead of "proprietary formulation". This suggests his opinion of the information is more of a trick, than legitimate info.

Again, you seem to have a very low threshold for forming opinions. Just because ingredients are secret (which they are in this case) does not imply they are a trick any more than "proprietary formulation" implies they work as claimed.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

HMM, but that doesn't explain the bottle of soda water in the picture above the vinegar...(sarcasm)

Oh, I forgot that one.

But in truth, it wasn't actually money, just free soda water for life.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

FWIW, R2R management decided to allow the link to another forum in the case of the post earlier in this thread since it was primarily for informational purposes. It was briefly blocked but now is not.

 

[Oceansize]

So, basically what you guys are saying is I should be dosing ketchup?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

So, basically what you guys are saying is I should be dosing ketchup?

Brings out the reds in acros.

 

[biom]

So, basically what you guys are saying is I should be dosing ketchup?

Yes, but don't use DIY tomato juice, because we are not sure what are secret ingredients in the ketchup (except of tomato juice)

 

[Downbeach]

So, basically what you guys are saying is I should be dosing ketchup?

Brings out the reds in acros.

I think you should be using Catsup, since it will work so much better due to its proprietary ingredients.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

I don't know what's funnier, the catsup comment or the attempt to belittle the proprietary ingredients concept (and the possibility people might actually believe it's not possible! lawl)

 

[Daniel@R2R]