Warning: Use Vibrant at your own risk

[Karen00]

I would still condemn them for doing what I was suggesting but I thought it would explain the ingredients list on the bottle. I used btk as an example because in Canada the ingredients list the bacteria but not the insecticidal proteins produced by the bacteria, it is sold as an organic approved biological pesticide with none of the normal pesticide regulations. I'm not a chemist I was just using a precedent from horticulture as that is my field. I brought this up to further my own understanding on the subject not to convince anyone of anything. I understand how the theory I broached does not apply after that discussion. I do apologize if I offended anyone that was not my intention nor is it my intention to defend UWC.

I wonder if this should be reported to the government (btk). From my understanding if a pesticide like chemical is produced that is regulated then it has to be listed/registered/etc. If a natural known pesticide is produced (let's say tea tree oil) that is not regulated then it doesn't have to be listed so it would depend on what is produced by the bacteria. In the case of Vibrant, even if it was bacteria producing the algaecide, the resulting chemical is epa/government regulated.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Does not matter how its made I agree but if the chemical is inside bacteria you could list the bacteria as your ingredient instead of that chemical. Alot of the seafood we eat have high levels of mercury if I want to compost seafood at home I am allowed, if I was to dump the equivalent amount of mercury that is in that seafood in my garden I am breaking the law. Dead broken down bacteria would just be ammonia by the time of testing but the guaranteed analysis on the packaging would say bacteria as that's what it contained when packaged. I can buy apricot kernels and kill myself from (amygdalin) cyanide poisoning. It would be alot harder to try and buy packaged cyanide.

The algaecide/bactericide/molluscicide in Algaefix/Busan 77/vibrant cannot be made by any bacteria and to make a genetically engineered bacteria to produce it would be harder than curing all cancers. Bacteria cannot be engineered (with any currently known technology) to make molecules like this which no organism is naturally capable of producing.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

So if I discovered or altered a bacteria species that creates or can accumulate ammonium salts similar to Polixetonium chloride I could not sell that product as bacteria?

The material is itself a wholly synthetic bactericide and sold for that purpose, so it seems extraordinarily unlikely you could pack synthetic polymers into live bacteria for sale, even if it was legal.

 

[fulltang]

It really is incredibly callous to knowingly lie about a product that if used can result in a very real loss of animal life, cost of a tank crash aside. I genuinely hope this guy didn't intentionally mislead in order to make a buck, but that's a case he'll have to make. If he chooses not to make a case, then it's left to the court of public opinion and the chips will fall where they may.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Uv can also break down chemicals.
could also have killed things in the water that the algicide then binds to. Could slow the uptake of any releases phosphate by killing things in the water unrelated to vibrant.

I don’t know why ya all keep grasping for something that isn’t there. It has been undeniably established and even said by UWC (during one of they goal post shifts) that there is no living bacteria in the bottle.

FWIW, it is well known in the scientific literature that UV accelerates the oxidation of quaternary ammonium compounds,

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

That wasn't my point. He showed UV reduced the effectiveness of Vibrant, which implies UV is killing the active ingredient. Bacteria. If there is no bacteria in the bottle then the UV effect didn't exist or it was a result of an unidentified cause.

No, it suggests UV is doing something. Might be all sorts of things, like accelerated binding of the quat to dead bacteria bits or direct degradation of the polymer.

 

[atlantean]

I hope emerald crabs don't turn out to be fraudsters too.

 

[N.Sreefer]

I wonder if this should be reported to the government (btk). From my understanding if a pesticide like chemical is produced that is regulated then it has to be listed/registered/etc. If a natural known pesticide is produced (let's say tea tree oil) that is not regulated then it doesn't have to be listed so it would depend on what is produced by the bacteria. In the case of Vibrant, even if it was bacteria producing the algaecide, the resulting chemical is epa/government regulated.

With btk the bacteria is listed (as an organic pesticide) but the chemicals produced are not regulated and don't need to be listed. The only caution they legally need to put (and is on there) is contains sulphites, with an ammonium salt based algaecide it would have to have more protective measures listed. I don't mind admitting when I'm wrong and I was I didn't realize NMR showed no bacterial metabolites.

The material is itself a wholly synthetic bactericide and sold for that purpose, so it seems extraordinarily unlikely you could pack synthetic polymers into live bacteria for sale, even if it was legal.

Certainly unlikely but impossible? If you cultured non specific bacteria strains in dilute algaecide solution choose the species that accumulates the highest amount of the chemical in question and has the highest survival rate then package that species for sale with vinegar and amino acids added. Keep in mind when I ask this that I didn't even realize this ammonium salt was wholly synthetic. I am a layman and I conceded I was wrong already haha.

 

[learning2reef]

I hope emerald crabs don't turn out to be fraudsters too.

Hah! Well in my old tank they could have cared less about bubble algae and instead loved to eat my green zoas.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Certainly unlikely but impossible? If you cultured non specific bacteria strains in dilute algaecide solution choose the species that accumulates the highest amount of the chemical in question and has the highest survival rate then package that species for sale with vinegar and amino acids added. Keep in mind when I ask this that I didn't even realize this ammonium salt was wholly synthetic. I am a layman and I conceded I was wrong already haha.

Impossible, no. But that’s a crazy criteria.

It’s also not impossible for the polymer in Vibrant to have originated at BRS in Algaefix, where the bottle was hit by a meteor, which then flew through the air and landed at UWC, broke open and filled the empty bottles of Vibrant on a shelf. Then a UWC employee mistakenly thought someone just left the tops off, so they put new lids on and shipped it out for sale. lol

Both possibilities are so unlikely as the not be worthy of consideration, IMO.

 

[rtparty]

Impossible, no. But that’s a crazy criteria.

It’s also not impossible for the polymer in Vibrant to have originated at BRS in Algaefix, where the bottle was hit by a meteor, which then flew through the air and landed at UWC, broke open and filled the empty bottles of Vibrant on a shelf. Then a UWC employee mistakenly thought someone just left the tops off, so they put new lids on and shipped it out for sale. lol

Both possibilities are so unlikely as the not be worthy of consideration, IMO.

The meteor theory is actually more plausible than anything UWC ever talked about...I see a marketing job in your future Randy. Ya know, just in case the whole chemist thing doesn't pan out ;Hilarious

 

[LRT]

Impossible, no. But that’s a crazy criteria.

It’s also not impossible for the polymer in Vibrant to have originated at BRS in Algaefix, where the bottle was hit by a meteor, which then flew through the air and landed at UWC, broke open and filled the empty bottles of Vibrant on a shelf. Then a UWC employee mistakenly thought someone just left the tops off, so they put new lids on and shipped it out for sale. lol

Both possibilities are so unlikely as the not be worthy of consideration, IMO.

Not only the most plausible scenario but pretty much the only explanation we've had to date!

 

[polyppal]

Internet losers attacking a small American owned business?

How can we be sure who planted the Busan-77 in this product?!?! Could these R2R eco-terrorists have alternate motives?!?!? Are they working with Putin?!?!! Could it be ANTIFA?!?!

And why is API forcing the employees in its laboratory to wear masks?!?!!

 

[BanjoBandito]

I hope emerald crabs don't turn out to be fraudsters too.

Oh god, who’s gonna tell him? CRAB GONNA CRAB.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

We are closing this thread for now because there’s too much chatter that is verging on violating the terms of service. We will reopen it if further info warrants it. I will also add to it the actions REEF2REEF is taking with respect to UWC which will play out in some fashion over the next few days.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

As to next steps, REEF2REEF management has notified UWC that a suitable response is expected by a specific deadline in order to remain in good standing on this site. As of my writing this, they have not responded to that communication (which did not go through me).
In my opinion, the logical place to respond is the science thread in the chem forum, so there’s no concern about this closed thread preventing a response.
That thread is still open for any sort of science discussion of Vibrant and it’s composition, but not discussion of tangential topics.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

UWC has not responded, either publicly or privately.

Consequently, Reef2Reef has temporarily suspended UWC as sponsor pending further resolution of the situation.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Bump

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Here’s the current status:

R2R has chosen to suspend the sponsorship from UWC based based on the concerns surrounding one of their products. UWC responded to let us know they understood why we had to take this action, but that they do intend to respond and clear things up as soon as they are able to work through their audits and related challenges.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Response will be delayed. Jeff (owner of UWC) intended to respond yesterday, but the EPA and Mn Department of Agriculture arrived at UWC yesterday for a "for cause" inspection. I am told they were there all day yesterday and plan to be there again today.

FWIW, I saw a picture of the first page of the official EPA notice as proof.

Update to this closed thread.

It has now been one month since the EPA inspection and UWC has not responded.