The Other Way to Run a Reef Tank (no Quarantine)

[MnFish1]

See Mn. You did it again. I said copper is a poison and it will kill bacteria. You added "all" bacteria. I didn't say all. Just like if I used weed killer on my lawn, I would expect it to kill the weeds, but I doubt it would kill all the weeds. Some weeds may be hidden behind something or not enough weed killer hit it. I also know napalm will kill people, but it doesn't always kill all the people. Not to many things are perfect. But does copper kill or disrupt gut bacteria? Yes it does:

Showing results for does copper kill beneficial bacteria
Search instead for does copper kill benificial bacteria

Search Results​

Featured snippet from the web​

Copper does kill germs
Copper has antimicrobial properties, meaning it can kill microorganisms like bacteria and viruses. ... It interferes with proteins that operate important functions that keep bacterial cells alive.Dec 28, 2020

Does copper kill nitrifying bacteria?
Copper is also toxic to the nitrifying bacteria in the biofil- ter. ... By contrast, bacteria that can cause disease in fish are much more resistant to copper, with some only inhibited or killed at free copper levels as high as 1.25 mg/L (Cardeilhac and Whitaker 1988).

Where copper could be used​

Currently, stainless steel or plastics are used for sinks, counters, beds and other surfaces in health care environments, but while stainless steel and plastic are easy to clean (the main reason they're used in such places), it also demonstrably harbors far more bacteria and viruses than a similar copper surface does — and over time, small scratches, dings and holes can hide even more.


It's especially important that the most dangerous superbugs, responsible for the death and illness of already-sick people, are killed by copper. That includes methicillin-resistant staph (MRSA); other staph bacteria; adenoviruses; the flu virus (all types); and even fungus. In a study published in the International Journal of Food Microbiology, 99.9 percent of E.coli bacteria was killed after an hour on a copper table, whereas it survived for weeks on stainless steel.

Actually, I didn't do it again lol. Its all about how one reads the sentences you posted - and with copper - Its all based on concentration. And - Copper will at a certain concentration kill 'All' bacteria - at least those that live in tanks. My point was that at the concentrations used in QT tanks - at least many versions do not kill bacteria to a significant degree - but they will kill parasites. Thus - I do not believe your opinion as to the effects of copper on 'intestinal bacteria' in fish (which is I assume the bacteria you're talking about) is significant at the prescribed dose. After all we're talking about the risks of copper in QT tanks right?

And you're also correct certain coppers can affect nitrifiying bacteria.

 

[MnFish1]

This is too simplistic.

You're making some very broad assumptions about the husbandry of the aquarist. I agree with the premise that transportation of the fish through the supply chain is incredibly stressful. I would also add that because of the concentration of many fish from many places there are going to be far more than X and Y present. A and B from every tank that the fish has resided in will likely be present. This is a hellava load on the fishes immune system. At this point I will state that the fishes immune system will be working in overdrive. Add starvation as a damper to the immune response and the fish will need to start burning reserves to keep up. When the fish hits the tank it's immune response will be in over drive and it will have a hunger that won't stop. Sound familar?

Let's say we are lucky enough to get the fish eating. Their appetite will be insatiable. As you feed that appetite you are fueling their immune system. The question is how far they have depleted their reserves. Too far they die. When they die it will be like Paul's 99 year old grandmother, from something. What then do we say was the real cause of death. The disease that took advantage of devastated biological system, or the cause of the devastation of the biological system. Either way they are dead.

If a very stressed fish is introduced into a tank that is 100% stress free, this is an assumption that this is possible, but what Paul is trying to say his tank is. Then what happens? More than likely the fish will get sick. Why, I use examples in my own life. If I am in a very stressful outdoor situation, for me this is often a cold situation, then when the situation is gotten through is when the sickness happens. This is why people that use natural systems strive to provide habitates that are stress free. Places for fish to hide, good oxygen levels, and yes even nutrious food. All of these things help fish to destress and go back to "normal". The going back to normal takes time, and it is during this time that things need to remain stable. Also during this time X and Y will be in check and will not be as damaging as A and B, but a solidly biodiverse tank will quickly adapt to A and B and blunt their impact.

None of what I have said is proven. It is my attempt to piece together the observations that I have made. I can however solidly say that what I have said matches the experience that I have had. It is very unlikely we will get studies one way or another, because there is no money involved.


If they have immunity from the wild or even as they move through the systems, then they have immunity. How long that immunity lasts is unknown. The question I have is if they have immunity then why bother to QT, and when I say QT I am assuming medicated QT. How would medicating a fish that has been innoculated be of any value other than to maybe relieve symptoms. Relieving symptoms has it's value, that is why we have pain medications, because they help your body calm down to start healing. With that we would have to as aquarists weigh the relieving of symptoms vs. the movement to a stress free environment.


Affect how? Positively or negatively? If the treatment blunts the immunity and only provides partial immunity then I think that that pretty answers why not to use the medication. If the treatment helps with immunity, then I am skeptical and would want to see some evidence of that mechanism.

I sent you a PM - with my response

 

[HuduVudu]

Thus - I do not believe your opinion as to the effects of copper on 'intestinal bacteria' in fish (which is I assume the bacteria you're talking about) is significant at the prescribed dose.

I disagree with this.

Things that are antiboitic or antibacterial hit the gut hard in humans why wouldn't this carry over to fish? I am too lazy to dig up studies so you can chastise me for that.

 

[MnFish1]

I disagree with this.

Things that are antiboitic or antibacterial hit the gut hard in humans why wouldn't this carry over to fish? I am too lazy to dig up studies so you can chastise me for that.

Here is the answer. In humans - yes - antibiotics CAN cause significant problems. Chemotherapy CAN cause significant problems. But in MOST people they do not develop significant 'infection' after antibiotics (Ie they do not 'hit the gut hard' in most people (for example in one study - of 71 people who received antibiotics - about 10 percent developed 'diarrhea' - and not necessarily 'severe' or 'worrisome' diarrhea the range I saw was 5 % to 39%- depending on the population). They are rapidly reversed with probiotics. Some people need more advanced care. So - to make a statement which suggests that most fish will have a problem with QT medication - to the point of 'killing the immunity/immune system' to parasites - is not supported (IMHO). Now - if you're talking about giving a fish prophylactic antibiotics - I would probably feed a pro-biotic type of food after the antibiotics were done.

 

[theMeat]

Diarrhea, hmm

 

[MnFish1]

Diarrhea, hmm

Yes - lol Diarrhea - which occurs in on average 10 percent of people. The point is its not 100%. its not even 50%. My guess is that damage from current use of prophylactic antibiotics/QT in Fish probably has the same level of toxicity. I don't know of any studies that suggest its more (or less) - I also don't know of any studies that directly suggest that the immune system of a fish is killed with that treatment - or that feeding a worm or clam will have the exact bacteria to replace that lost by such a treatment.

 

[theMeat]

Studying diarrhea sounds sh!ty

 

[KrisReef]

Yes - lol Diarrhea - which occurs in on average 10 percent of people. The point is its not 100%. its not even 50%. My guess is that damage from current use of prophylactic antibiotics/QT in Fish probably has the same level of toxicity. I don't know of any studies that suggest its more (or less) - I also don't know of any studies that directly suggest that the immune system of a fish is killed with that treatment - or that feeding a worm or clam will have the exact bacteria to replace that lost by such a treatment.

Autoimmune issues in individuals can be helped with antibiotics. Trouble is for me, I can't take a routine dose of antibiotics for longer than a few months time without getting a "funny" gut reaction. Worse, it's hereditary. N=2 level study indicates vomiting and diarrhea are likely side effects in this non-scientific study.

Another thing is, I learned the hard way and have lots of damage from the autoimmune disfunction. My son went to my doctor who prescribed the anitbiotics I told him about and they worked to check the autoimmune damage spread, but again they can't be taken constantly. At least with occasional dosing when the condition manifests, my son may be able to not get crippled like grandma.

The problem with knowing something is that oftentimes no one else really believes you can know a thing because it seems different than what they understand.

 

[Stigigemla]

I dont believe that copper medication of fish has much to do with internal bacteria.
Here is a study over copper.

Copper toxicity in fish - Fish Pathology

Copper is a significant trace element necessary for the normal growth and metabolism of living organisms. However, if there is overexposure, it can be toxic.

fishhistopathology.com

In the article is some pictures from livers damaged by copper and it also mentions that the production of antibodies will be diminished.

The most obvious thing that I have noted is that fish from a shop in my neighbourhood with continuous low level copper poisoning often get spots after coming to their home aquarium.
The fishes in the tank often show no spots. It is very seldom that customers that buy fish from me get spots in their tanks. I have 2 customers that has had no spots at all in 10 years while buying all fish from me. UVC in the quarantine and shop.

In the old books they said the copper medication was to be made only one time because the lethal rate was too high if You made it again.

 

[MnFish1]

I dont believe that copper medication of fish has much to do with internal bacteria.
Here is a study over copper.

Copper toxicity in fish - Fish Pathology

Copper is a significant trace element necessary for the normal growth and metabolism of living organisms. However, if there is overexposure, it can be toxic.

fishhistopathology.com

In the article is some pictures from livers damaged by copper and it also mentions that the production of antibodies will be diminished.

The most obvious thing that I have noted is that fish from a shop in my neighbourhood with continuous low level copper poisoning often get spots after coming to their home aquarium.
The fishes in the tank often show no spots. It is very seldom that customers that buy fish from me get spots in their tanks. I have 2 customers that has had no spots at all in 10 years while buying all fish from me. UVC in the quarantine and shop.

In the old books they said the copper medication was to be made only one time because the lethal rate was too high if You made it again.

This I think is a key point. Copper for a short-term quarantine - is not likely to be hurtful. Copper given for long periods of time likely does cause problems. I agree with you though - I don't see it changing gut bacteria. There is bacteria everywhere - including in flake foods, and of course LRS, etc.

 

[Paul B]

Stigigemla, there is copper in us and fish and it is a needed mineral. But a fishes gut has the same concentration of copper as the surrounding water which should kill or at least impair the gut microbes and bacteria.

I used copper in my tank for years, but I know better now.

From your link:
The impact of copper exposure on the immune system is associated with a decrease in the phagocytic function of macrophages and a decrease in the production of antibodies.

Also from your link. Other consequences of copper:
High copper concentrations result in rapid mortality, partly a consequence of hypoxaemia, likely due in part to histopathological changes such as cell swelling and thickening of lamellae, congestion, telangiectasia, epithelial detachment, lamellar synechiae and even fusion of lamellae. These changes lead to an overall reduction in gill surface area and impaired laminar water flow, which have the saving effect of reducing exposure to the pollutant. Unfortunately, this very same response impairs oxygen uptake and carbon dioxide excretion, which leads in turn to an increase in PCO2 and acidosis (increased blood lactate). Instead of hypoxaemia, however, mortality likely results from ionoregulatory disturbances that induce elevated blood pressure, leading to cardiovascular collapse.

 

[MnFish1]

Stigigemla, there is copper in us and fish and it is a needed mineral. But a fishes gut has the same concentration of copper as the surrounding water which should kill or at least impair the gut microbes and bacteria.

I used copper in my tank for years, but I know better now.

From your link:
The impact of copper exposure on the immune system is associated with a decrease in the phagocytic function of macrophages and a decrease in the production of antibodies.

Also from your link. Other consequences of copper:
High copper concentrations result in rapid mortality, partly a consequence of hypoxaemia, likely due in part to histopathological changes such as cell swelling and thickening of lamellae, congestion, telangiectasia, epithelial detachment, lamellar synechiae and even fusion of lamellae. These changes lead to an overall reduction in gill surface area and impaired laminar water flow, which have the saving effect of reducing exposure to the pollutant. Unfortunately, this very same response impairs oxygen uptake and carbon dioxide excretion, which leads in turn to an increase in PCO2 and acidosis (increased blood lactate). Instead of hypoxaemia, however, mortality likely results from ionoregulatory disturbances that induce elevated blood pressure, leading to cardiovascular collapse.

The questions I have about this are 1) - is this at the common dose used in QT (i.e. all of the negative effects) - or at toxic doses. 2) do the changes reverse when copper is stopped (after 2 weeks)?

 

[Paul B]

I have no Idea.

 

[MnFish1]

I have no Idea.

Right - so I guess I don't understand the point?

 

[HuduVudu]

The point is the original title of the thread.

The Other Way to Run a Reef Tank (no Quarantine)

I find it incredibly frustrating to run around and around in circles trying to apply the science and then back and forth over minutae.

Neither scientests or aquarists really understand all of the mechanisms at play. There are too many factors to properly hold constants. There is no money from studies to even get close to the spagetti sticking, so why endlessly debate the details when all we have is empircal evidence?

If quarantining is so good why do MANY successful reefers eschew it? It seems to me that all of us don't want dead fish for many reasons, so why would people lie and quarantine when they say they don't. To be a parriah? I can see why so many don't talk about this way of doing things because they get attacked relentless with the same misplaced science moral authority. All you have to do is look at their build threads of the authorties on the subject and watch the progession of their fish populations to get an idea of how well quarantining works for them, but hey, today their tank looks good.

Paul has made many really good points for me. He has also made some silly and non-useful points too. One that he makes I think is very relevant to this conversation. He has not seen any long term quarantined tanks. It's not to say they don't exist ... maybe they do, but wouldn't the owners be showcasing their methods and how good they work? Also Paul talks about how when he started he was one of the few that started doing the cooper. Let that sink in, he was part of the cadre of people that "invented" medicating and quarantine.

I think that almost all people that no longer quarantine at some point in their hobby did. If it worked so good why did they give it up? I used to medicate and quarantine. Empirically it just seemed to add more stress and kill the fish. My first tanks were almost always with copper because I didn't want my loved expensive fish to die. It hurts when that happens. I stopped because it didn't work. It also seems to create brittle monolithic systems that fall at the slightest change. Which is why I am with Paul about the long term implications of medication and quarantine.

There are many many many many threads on the methods the intracacies and the gotchyas on quarantining. Medicating and quarantining feels good and makes sense in most people's minds because you are getting rid of the bad things that cause bad outcomes. Our entire society is built on these things. Get the bad things to go away with a shot or a pill and then you will be safe from all of those bad things. This is what people want and what people want will be given to them. It is incredibly hard to go against this line of thinking. Strangely, this thinking never seems to produce results it says it will. We are always waiting for the five years to be up, so we can try to implement another plan rooted in the same idea. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. The problem is that we don't understand the same thing is the same idea, not the same implementation.

I am going to continue to not quarantine. Maybe I don't have a reason good enough for everyone that says that I can't or it won't work, but I know from experience it does. I love my fish and want them to live long healthy lives so I am going to do what works IRL not what works on paper.

 

[MnFish1]

The point is the original title of the thread.

The Other Way to Run a Reef Tank (no Quarantine)

I find it incredibly frustrating to run around and around in circles trying to apply the science and then back and forth over minutae.

Neither scientests or aquarists really understand all of the mechanisms at play. There are too many factors to properly hold constants. There is no money from studies to even get close to the spagetti sticking, so why endlessly debate the details when all we have is empircal evidence?

If quarantining is so good why do MANY successful reefers eschew it? It seems to me that all of us don't want dead fish for many reasons, so why would people lie and quarantine when they say they don't. To be a parriah? I can see why so many don't talk about this way of doing things because they get attacked relentless with the same misplaced science moral authority. All you have to do is look at their build threads of the authorties on the subject and watch the progession of their fish populations to get an idea of how well quarantining works for them, but hey, today their tank looks good.

Paul has made many really good points for me. He has also made some silly and non-useful points too. One that he makes I think is very relevant to this conversation. He has not seen any long term quarantined tanks. It's not to say they don't exist ... maybe they do, but wouldn't the owners be showcasing their methods and how good they work? Also Paul talks about how when he started he was one of the few that started doing the cooper. Let that sink in, he was part of the cadre of people that "invented" medicating and quarantine.

I think that almost all people that no longer quarantine at some point in their hobby did. If it worked so good why did they give it up? I used to medicate and quarantine. Empirically it just seemed to add more stress and kill the fish. My first tanks were almost always with copper because I didn't want my loved expensive fish to die. It hurts when that happens. I stopped because it didn't work. It also seems to create brittle monolithic systems that fall at the slightest change. Which is why I am with Paul about the long term implications of medication and quarantine.

There are many many many many threads on the methods the intracacies and the gotchyas on quarantining. Medicating and quarantining feels good and makes sense in most people's minds because you are getting rid of the bad things that cause bad outcomes. Our entire society is built on these things. Get the bad things to go away with a shot or a pill and then you will be safe from all of those bad things. This is what people want and what people want will be given to them. It is incredibly hard to go against this line of thinking. Strangely, this thinking never seems to produce results it says it will. We are always waiting for the five years to be up, so we can try to implement another plan rooted in the same idea. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. The problem is that we don't understand the same thing is the same idea, not the same implementation.

I am going to continue to not quarantine. Maybe I don't have a reason good enough for everyone that says that I can't or it won't work, but I know from experience it does. I love my fish and want them to live long healthy lives so I am going to do what works IRL not what works on paper.

I only asked a question to Paul - whose post I quoted - what is the point of posting the toxicity of copper if its not the level we use in tanks. If it is the same concentration - it makes sense that it would cause damage. I mean too much oxygen can kill you - if I posted that - would it suggest that we shouldn't try to optimize oxygen levels in the tank? No. So - what I said had Nothing to do with whether or not to QT - and no one suggested you (or anyone else) should stop 'not quarantining' - right?

 

[HuduVudu]

I only asked a question to Paul - whose post I quoted - what is the point of posting the toxicity of copper if its not the level we use in tanks. If it is the same concentration - it makes sense that it would cause damage. I mean too much oxygen can kill you - if I posted that - would it suggest that we shouldn't try to optimize oxygen levels in the tank? No. So - what I said had Nothing to do with whether or not to QT - and no one suggested you (or anyone else) should stop 'not quarantining' - right?

This is a public forum. You are posting publicly for all to see. I am quoting your post. My points are directed at you. Does that mean Paul can't adress my points exactly? I don't get the logic here. If I am standing around in a group of people and someone says something to someone else does that mean that someone that has a relavent opinion can't speak? If you want only the answer from someone then PM them as you did me.

There will be many many people that read this post that can't or don't want to respond. That is why the posts are public. This is how humans work. The goal is to flesh out ideas to gather information, that is what we do. Generally speaking in a public group if one person says something to the effect of I wasn't talking to you to another person whom question was directed, there will be some conflict. Sadly it is taking time for the online to catch up with the real world.

I will point out again what is the point of arguing the minutae of medicating when that is not part of the "no quarantine" method.

 

[MnFish1]

I find it incredibly frustrating to run around and around in circles trying to apply the science and then back and forth over minutae.

Neither scientests or aquarists really understand all of the mechanisms at play. There are too many factors to properly hold constants. There is no money from studies to even get close to the spagetti sticking, so why endlessly debate the details when all we have is empircal evidence?

I am only answering this because you apparently wanted my opinion. This is a 'discussion board' its not IMHO a one person's opinion board. Which is probably why people are discussing. If you don't like debating minutae skip those posts?

 

[MnFish1]

This is a public forum. You are posting publicly for all to see. I am quoting your post.

I will point out again what is the point of arguing the minutae of medicating when that is not part of the "no quarantine" method.

I dont know - I wasn't the one that posted about copper door knobs and how toxic it was. I was responding to that. I don't know - I was just wondering - maybe I'm wrong - why stuff about copper was being posted - (By the OP) - if it has nothing to do with the 'thread'. In fact - the 'no quarantine method' is done that way because of the purported toxicity of copper - right?

 

[HuduVudu]

I am only answering this because you apparently wanted my opinion. This is a 'discussion board' its not IMHO a one person's opinion board. Which is probably why people are discussing. If you don't like debating minutae skip those posts?

There comes a point when the discussion ends. Points are made or not, hopefully things were learned and information was exchanged, but beating a dead horse is just a waste of everyone's time.

I think I was pretty clear about the public forum aspect of posting. You are now dominating the posting and the horse is dead. Now it just seems like a personal vendetta, from an angry person. I am posting this because sometimes people that go on jihads are not aware that they are on such a path. I would tell my friends this if they were doing it, and they would tell me.

I will leave you to hitting the carcass with a bat. I am not really interested in the mess that follows.