Will adding Purigen help limit water changes?

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I already stated I would not respond to your ongoing false information posts. If you really want me to point out why you are wrong, I suggest starting a new thread.

 

[Lavey29]

I already stated I would not respond to your ongoing false information posts. If you really want me to point out why you are wrong, I suggest starting a new thread.

That's fine, I completely understand. Even Albert Einstein made mistakes. I'll contact both manufacturers and determine what the exact similarities are with the products if they will share those details.

 

[Miami Reef]

That's fine, I completely understand. Even Albert Einstein made mistakes. I'll contact both manufacturers and determine what the exact similarities are with the products if they will share those details.

I don’t think you understand who you’re speaking to.

Dr. Holmes-Farley is almost certainly the most experienced and knowledgeable person in polymers we’ll ever encounter.

That’s really no way to talk to someone. He knows medicine.

 

[Lavey29]

I don’t think you understand who you’re speaking to.

Dr. Holmes-Farley is almost certainly the most experienced and knowledgeable person in polymers we’d ever come across in our lifetime.

That’s really no way to talk to someone.

Most certainly do and was simply expressing my differing opinion and offering linked references to support my opinion. There is only one person who is right 100% of the time without exception and hopefully you know who that person is.

Also please look at my first response to him in this thread which apparently was not satisfactory for him.

 

[Miami Reef]

Also please look at my first response to him in this thread which apparently was not satisfactory for him.

You said you agreed with him, but you “bet” there are substantial similarities.

Based on the vastly different marketing claims, which is, at best, what the products can achieve, it is illogical to assume they are the same or even similar.

I think the mistake is assuming there are about as many polymers as there are activated carbon.

 

[Lavey29]

You said you agreed with him, but you “bet” there are substantial similarities.

Based on the vastly different marketing claims, which is, at best, what the products can achieve, it is illogical to assume they are the same or even similar.

I think the mistake is assuming there are about as many polymers as there are activated carbon.

Unless we are provided the exact accurate chemical make up of both, it is impossible to know the exact similarities or differences. One can only make an assumption based on the limited product info from the manufacturer and our forum expert has always told us to be suspicious of manufacturer claims here too.

 

[Miami Reef]

has always told us to be suspicious of manufacturer claims here too.

I think that’s because some manufacturers tend to overstate their products. Some will flat-out lie, like Vibrant, but that is the minority IMO.

I believe marketing claims can sometimes give us clues of what the product is or isn’t made up of.

Since both products claim they achieve different goals, why would you assume they are more similar than not?

 

[Miami Reef]

Chemipure themselves never said their product contains Purigen; it contains a polymer, but neither brands claimed they are the same or similar type of polymer.

Your guess is a shot in the dark. Think horses, not zebras, when you hear hoof-beats.

 

[Lavey29]

I think that’s because some manufacturers tend to overstate their products. Some will flat-out lie, like Vibrant, but that is the minority IMO.

I believe marketing claims can sometimes give us clues of what the product is or isn’t made up of.

Since both products claim they achieve different goals, why would you assume they are more similar than not?

Have you put the powder from both side by side? Could you tell the difference? That is one similarity right there just to start. Zebras right? I think the wording from the manufacturers differ because one does not want to infringe on the other but I bet a full lab teast of each would be surprising.

 

[Miami Reef]

Have you put the powder from both side by side? Could you tell the difference? That is one similarity right there just to start. Zebras right? I think the wording from the manufacturers differ because one does not want to infringe on the other but I bet a full lab teast of each would be surprising.

Polymers are often colorless or white. The grain sizes appear to be different.

Since neither company said they are the same or similar polymer, your claim is simply a guess.

 

[Lavey29]

Polymers are often colorless or white. The grain sizes appear to be different.

Since neither company said they are the same or similar polymer, your claim is simply a guess.

Correct a guess, just like the resident expert because neither of us have a complete factual basis to form a conclusive opinion because neither company provides complete details of their chemical make up. Look at what limited info purigen puts on their product package.

 

[Lavey29]

I don’t think you understand who you’re speaking to.

Dr. Holmes-Farley is almost certainly the most experienced and knowledgeable person in polymers we’ll ever encounter.

That’s really no way to talk to someone. He knows medicine.

I do most certainly respect his contributions and his past opinions on chemipure were duly noted as well as he described below:

There are several possible explanations that I can see:

1. I'm wrong for some reason and the product does directly bind phosphate
2. The binding of organics and preventing their breakdown and subsequent release of phosphate caused a phosphate reduction
3. It would have declined anyway.
4. The decline is small and may be test variability/error.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I'll call Boyd and ask him

Did you get a response?

 

[Kengar]

Generic drugs are exact equivalents of the drug to allow them to be approved without clinical testing. They do not have modifications of the drug to avoid patent infringement.

Hi Randy,

I'd like to add a little clarification/further information to your post. Generic drugs aren't necessarily exactly the same as reference drugs. If they were and the reference drug were still under patent (and there can be many different ways the reference drug is patented), then there would be patent infringement.
In general, generic drugs can get FDA approval under the ANDA route (abbreviated new drug application) by "piggybacking" off of the clinical testing done for the original drug to be approved. Per U of G (that's University of Google Search),

"To file an ANDA (Abbreviated New Drug Application), generic drug applicants must demonstrate bioequivalence to the reference listed drug (RLD) in terms of safety, efficacy, and quality. This involves submitting detailed information on the active ingredient, usage conditions, dosage form, and labeling, along with evidence of bioavailability. Unlike new drug applications, ANDAs don't require preclinical or clinical trial data, as the FDA has already approved the RLD."

So the real touchstone for a generic is bioequivalence; this can be achieved even with certain differences relative to the original/reference drug.

Ken

 

[Miami Reef]

Generic drugs aren't necessarily exactly the same as reference drugs.

I think he said exact equivalents, meaning the active ingredient should be the same.

I could be wrong, though. Maybe I’m misunderstanding.

Following!