A Hypocrites View on Not Using Quarantine

[bluprntguy]

It does improve their overall health. If they aren't continuously exposed for around 6 months they can lose their innate immunity to that parasite. This would make them more susceptible to succumb to future exposures to those parasites.
If your immunity acquired via vaccination to measles stopped working, would you consider that good or bad to your overall health?

One minute you are claiming that you didn't say that infecting fish with ich improves their overall health and demand we give you citations (which I did), then a few hours later on post #325 you again state that being infected with ich "improves their overall health".

Also on post #325 you compare fish's immune system to humans to prove your point, but scroll back to post #193 and you claim that you can't compare fish immunity to mammals because they are so very, very, different.

 

[Paul B]

So if all the spots disappeared, is it now just a plain box fish instead of a spotted one?

I have been waiting for these spots to disappear, but they just get darker. I think it's black ich.


Fish come to us fully immune from just about everything as the sea contains them all. If they were not immune in the sea, there would be no fish. It is our job IMO to keep up that immunity and the only way to do that is to bring those parasites into the tank with the fish like they were living in the sea. The parasites will keep trying to sample some fish flesh and the immune system will keep repelling and killing them. In a stable, normal tank, the parasites will continue to thrive just like they are supposed to. This is not cruel, it is the way fish normally live.

We also harbor parasites (some of us have more parasites ) they do us no harm just like they do the fish no harm. I have been throwing fish into my tank along with NSW, mud, amphipods and seaweeds for over 40 years and I have yet to lose a fish to any disease. That is totally because of the population of diseases prevalent in my system. I work hard to "not" try to eliminate any pathogens because the more there is, the stronger the fish will become. If it has worked in my tank for 48 years, it should work anywhere as long as the proper food is given.
How long did those researchers mentioned study parasites?

Many times I add fish straight into my tank that are loaded with parasites and I have always posted this. My fish never get sick. But a quarantined tank is an unhealthy, not normal tank because the fish are missing an important part of their physiology. Their immune system.
Again, how many quarantined fish live long enough to die of old age?

I know you like to quote scientists. In a recent issue of Popular Science, scientists working for NASA stated that one of the biggest challenges to long space travel is the lack of new bacteria and other pathogens. Humans, and fish need a constant supply of these things to remain healthy.

Fish quarantined for an extended time like 74 days or treated with certain drugs are at a huge risk to diseases. And if such a fish were to spawn, And spawning is not easy for those fish, their fry "probably" would not survive because they will not have the immunity that their Mother also doesn't have.

Ref:
Me.

 

[MnFish1]

I will give a couple pieces of information from Seachem's science department while I await their official response:

1. In their lab they have never seen a resistant form of parasite (velvet, ich, etc) above 2 ppm. THOUGH they have heard reports from hobbyists that this has occurred.
2. Resistance is not as much a function of 'dose' - as it is of time...... Ie - treat longer if you have a diseased fish - not necessarily increase the dose.
3. There are reports of resistant CI and Velvet from LFS - but - those seem more due to constant use of copper at 'therapeutic; dose (as the published literature suggests) as compared to 'low dose copper' in the supply chain.
4. Low dose copper does not 'mask' the symptoms of CI - if the fish has the parasite - they will show it - at 1ppm or whatever. There is not (that they have heard) a rationale to treat with a low dose of copper to 'hide' or mask CI or other parasites on fish.
5. The scientist will (or at least she said) will be sending information that they have considering this - in case I've mis-represented it. But - this is the minimum that she gave me - we had quite a long discussion.

 

[MnFish1]

One minute you are claiming that you didn't say that infecting fish with ich improves their overall health and demand we give you citations (which I did), then a few hours later on post #325 you again state that being infected with ich "improves their overall health".

Also on post #325 you compare fish's immune system to humans to prove your point, but scroll back to post #193 and you claim that you can't compare fish immunity to mammals because they are so very, very, different.

Stop criticizing and start saying what your proposed solutions are (JMO). BTW - the system is a bit glitchy - but I didnt see your citations....... to suggest what you're saying above - if I'm wrong - I apologize.

 

[Paul B]

Just look at the disease forum. In almost every case the quarantined fish comes down with something and all sorts of drugs have to be administered to try to cure the fish of a disease that was actually caused by the quarantine practice. Fish from the sea are very robust and almost never are sick. We do that to them, not the wholesaler, LFS or the guy in the canoe who collected the thing.

It is the stress that does it. Like Duh. But what do I know?

 

[Mastiffsrule]

propalactic

To me, Paul asked the most profound of questions. How many mature tanks, let’s say 10 years plus are stable and thriving (not meaning disease free) that are run strictly QT. Most of the posts I see are from newer tanks with issues even after QT. I am just guessing around 3 years or less.

If we could just figure out this PROPALACTIC process he is developing maybe it will revolutionize reefing as we know it. ;Smug

 

[MnFish1]

Just look at the disease forum. In almost every case the quarantined fish comes down with something and all sorts of drugs have to be administered to try to cure the fish of a disease that was actually caused by the quarantine practice. Fish from the sea are very robust and almost never are sick. We do that to them, not the wholesaler, LFS or the guy in the canoe who collected the thing.

It is the stress that does it. Like Duh. But what do I know?

Funny thing - though we disagree on some stuff - I cant argue with this.

 

[Lasse]

Wrong post from me

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

I will give a couple pieces of information from Seachem's science department while I await their official response:

1. In their lab they have never seen a resistant form of parasite (velvet, ich, etc) above 2 ppm. THOUGH they have heard reports from hobbyists that this has occurred.
2. Resistance is not as much a function of 'dose' - as it is of time...... Ie - treat longer if you have a diseased fish - not necessarily increase the dose.
3. There are reports of resistant CI and Velvet from LFS - but - those seem more due to constant use of copper at 'therapeutic; dose (as the published literature suggests) as compared to 'low dose copper' in the supply chain.
4. Low dose copper does not 'mask' the symptoms of CI - if the fish has the parasite - they will show it - at 1ppm or whatever. There is not (that they have heard) a rationale to treat with a low dose of copper to 'hide' or mask CI or other parasites on fish.
5. The scientist will (or at least she said) will be sending information that they have considering this - in case I've mis-represented it. But - this is the minimum that she gave me - we had quite a long discussion.

OH - and the other thing - they completely disagree with low - dose copper treatment - because - it would weaken the immune system of the involved fish - inviting fin rot, and other bacterial infections - that are not susceptible to copper. SO - they do not recommend that LFS, wholesalers (using their product) use low- dose copper in any form long-term

 

[Lasse]

I will give a couple pieces of information from Seachem's science department while I await their official response:

1. In their lab they have never seen a resistant form of parasite (velvet, ich, etc) above 2 ppm. THOUGH they have heard reports from hobbyists that this has occurred.
2. Resistance is not as much a function of 'dose' - as it is of time...... Ie - treat longer if you have a diseased fish - not necessarily increase the dose.
3. There are reports of resistant CI and Velvet from LFS - but - those seem more due to constant use of copper at 'therapeutic; dose (as the published literature suggests) as compared to 'low dose copper' in the supply chain.
4. Low dose copper does not 'mask' the symptoms of CI - if the fish has the parasite - they will show it - at 1ppm or whatever. There is not (that they have heard) a rationale to treat with a low dose of copper to 'hide' or mask CI or other parasites on fish.
5. The scientist will (or at least she said) will be sending information that they have considering this - in case I've mis-represented it. But - this is the minimum that she gave me - we had quite a long discussion.

Thank you

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Paul Sands]

Stop criticizing and start saying what your proposed solutions are (JMO). BTW - the system is a bit glitchy - but I didnt see your citations....... to suggest what you're saying above - if I'm wrong - I apologize.

I think the problem is that it’s impossible to have an honest discussion when people are constantly changing their arguments instead of just admitting that they were wrong.

 

[Paul Sands]

I have been waiting for these spots to disappear, but they just get darker. I think it's black ich.


Fish come to us fully immune from just about everything as the sea contains them all. If they were not immune in the sea, there would be no fish. It is our job IMO to keep up that immunity and the only way to do that is to bring those parasites into the tank with the fish like they were living in the sea. The parasites will keep trying to sample some fish flesh and the immune system will keep repelling and killing them. In a stable, normal tank, the parasites will continue to thrive just like they are supposed to. This is not cruel, it is the way fish normally live.

We also harbor parasites (some of us have more parasites ) they do us no harm just like they do the fish no harm. I have been throwing fish into my tank along with NSW, mud, amphipods and seaweeds for over 40 years and I have yet to lose a fish to any disease. That is totally because of the population of diseases prevalent in my system. I work hard to "not" try to eliminate any pathogens because the more there is, the stronger the fish will become. If it has worked in my tank for 48 years, it should work anywhere as long as the proper food is given.
How long did those researchers mentioned study parasites?

Many times I add fish straight into my tank that are loaded with parasites and I have always posted this. My fish never get sick. But a quarantined tank is an unhealthy, not normal tank because the fish are missing an important part of their physiology. Their immune system.
Again, how many quarantined fish live long enough to die of old age?

I know you like to quote scientists. In a recent issue of Popular Science, scientists working for NASA stated that one of the biggest challenges to long space travel is the lack of new bacteria and other pathogens. Humans, and fish need a constant supply of these things to remain healthy.

Fish quarantined for an extended time like 74 days or treated with certain drugs are at a huge risk to diseases. And if such a fish were to spawn, And spawning is not easy for those fish, their fry "probably" would not survive because they will not have the immunity that their Mother also doesn't have.

Ref:
Me.

This simply isn’t true. Sea and Reef (as just one example) breeds fish that have been through strict quarantine measures. Anyone can look on their “about us” page and see that their fish are disease and parasite free because of their conscious decision to do exactly what you are arguing against. They keep their fish healthy by not exposing them unnecessarily to parasites and diseases.

Edit: Also, their fish are fantastic and healthy. I’d buy all my fish from them if I could.

 

[MnFish1]

I think the problem is that it’s impossible to have an honest discussion when people are constantly changing their arguments instead of just admitting that they were wrong.

I agree - . but - apologetically - you talk in generalities rather than specifics. Again - apologetically - I dont think anyone here knows what you're talking about - again in the post above you're talking some general concept - without quoting a post - or pointing out an inconsistency. Sorry. I have no clue what you're talking about.

 

[Brew12]

One minute you are claiming that you didn't say that infecting fish with ich improves their overall health and demand we give you citations (which I did), then a few hours later on post #325 you again state that being infected with ich "improves their overall health".

I think you are purposely distorting what I have said at this point. I don't see why this is so hard for you to understand. Exposing fish to a pathogen will boost it's adaptive resistance to that parasite. The more pathogens the fish is immune to, the better it's overall health will be and the less likely it is to succumb to a pathogen. This makes the fish more healthy and not less healthy.

lso on post #325 you compare fish's immune system to humans to prove your point, but scroll back to post #193 and you claim that you can't compare fish immunity to mammals because they are so very, very, different.

I'll give you this. I should have said they don't always make good comparisons. As an example, a vaccination given to a person at birth can be good for life. For a fish, it would need to be repeated regularly. Mammals have a much stronger innate system than fish so fish rely more on their adaptive immune systems.
So, while comparisons can be made, it isn't appropriate to think that because a mammals works in a certain way that a fish immune system will work in the same way.

 

[MnFish1]

This simply isn’t true. Sea and Reef (as just one example) breeds fish that have been through strict quarantine measures. Anyone can look on their “about us” page and see that their fish are disease and parasite free because of their conscious decision to do exactly what you are arguing against. They keep their fish healthy by not exposing them unnecessarily to parasites and diseases.

Edit: Also, their fish are fantastic and healthy. I’d buy all my fish from them if I could.

I agree with you funny thing - and @Paul B can (but he might not) mention the multiple times he and I have debated these issues. The question in this thread is - what if we can no longer prophylactically QT (with chemicals/medication) without a prescription or some kind of permit. (@Brew12 can correct me if im wrong) - its not about whether QT or chemoprophylaxis or nothing is 'right or wrong'.....

Again what is your suggestion in this thread in the potential new era where treating prophylactically may not be allowed/easy?

There is a fair bit of data out there - if you choose to google it - im not going to repeat it for you - that introducing non-immune fish into a tank can cause the entire tank to succumb to disease - so - if your plan is to start a tank - and only put in fish that have not been exposed to 'whatever' - great - it may be what everyone is doing in 10 years. Currently - maybe not.

 

[MnFish1]

I'll give you this. I should have said they don't always make good comparisons. As an example, a vaccination given to a person at birth can be good for life. For a fish, it would need to be repeated regularly. Mammals have a much stronger innate system than fish so fish rely more on their adaptive immune systems.
So, while comparisons can be made, it isn't appropriate to think that because a mammals works in a certain way that a fish immune system will work in the same way.

I dont think you need to even give him/her this - tetanus shots - for example need to be boosted (in humans) - as do many others - im not going to list them. Typhoid for example needs to be much more frequent than others - if needed. This to me is just an example of someone wanting to start an argument in a thread trying to look for solutions - without providing any solution - only critiques?

 

[Brew12]

The question in this thread is - what if we can no longer prophylactically QT without a prescription or some kind of permit. (@Brew12 can correct me if im wrong) - its not about whether QT or chemoprophylaxis or nothing is 'right or wrong'.....

That was the focus of the article I put together. If you live in Canada and can no longer access anything regarded as a fish medication, what can you do to try and ensure healthy fish. I don't mind straying off course as long as good information is being shared.

that introducing non-immune fish into a tank causes the entire tank to succumb to disease - so - if your plan is to start a tank - and only put in fish that have not been exposed to 'whatever' - great - it may be what everyone is doing in 10 years. Currently - maybe not.

This will be an interesting challenge going forward for the hobby. How do you condition, or get adaptive immunity established in, a tank bred and raised fish. I love the idea of captive bred fish, but this will need to be worked out.

 

[Brew12]

This to me is just an example of someone wanting to start an argument in a thread trying to look for solutions - without providing any solution - only critiques?

I don't mind being challenged on anything I say as long as it is done in an honest manner. There is value in that. I'm sure people who read but don't comment in these threads have learned from my responses to these questions and accusations.

 

[MnFish1]

I don't mind being challenged on anything I say as long as it is done in an honest manner. There is value in that. I'm sure people who read but don't comment in these threads have learned from my responses to these questions and accusations.

I have asked both of them - what are their potential solutions to the questions that you mention in the OP. Neither answer...... Perhaps Im on ignore lol. which is fine.

 

[Mastiffsrule]

I think you are purposely distorting what I have said at this point. I don't see why this is so hard for you to understand. Exposing fish to a pathogen will boost it's adaptive resistance to that parasite. The more pathogens the fish is immune to, the better it's overall health will be and the less likely it is to succumb to a pathogen. This makes the fish more healthy and not less healthy.

I like this (not the beginning, but that’s personal preference). It drills down to a pure statement leaving little to misinterpret.