A Hypocrites View on Not Using Quarantine

[Brew12]

It's ok.
QT done wrong kills a lot of fish. And most of us have done it wrong because there are so many ways to screw up.
Done right, it's miraculous at protecting your display aquaria from disease. Simple but true.
It's not like we don't do the same thing with humans. The first 3 Apollo astronauts to return from the moon spent 3 weeks in QT.
(I don't think they used any medications or drugs on them during that time, but I could be mistaken!)
If someone is willing to deal with the possibility of disease in their display, fine, they shouldn't QT.
It may burn itself out, whatever gets through. Maybe nothing will ever get through.
Only some of your fish might die. Perhaps even none. Or, you might lose 90%.
I'm not really a gambler.

I'm an idealist who is not afraid of failure. I'm hoping we can find a way to maintain fish without living in fear of something slipping through our QT systems. Can it be done in the US? I have no idea. I think it is worth the effort to try and find out. As I've said a few times already... our time with current methods are short. They are already impossible in most of Europe. They are now illegal to do in Canada. I'd be shocked if they will still be legal and/or effective here in the US 10 years from now. I feel the time to start working harder toward a solution is 4 years ago, but I'll settle for now.

 

[ngoodermuth]

Alright. I am officially riled up. That’s a lot for me. I just read another thread like many before. “You must QT”

Where did this absolute QT required come from?? (Refer to my signature.). I am new and usually the last to stir the pot. Last thing I ever want is someone read my post and think I come off as anything other than caring and transparent. Celebrate positive and no such thing as failures, only opportunities to learn.

That said, the subject of QT is worse than a religious or political war. I have seen too many posts demanding QT is the only way it should be done. Where is the definitive article or research on the position eaither way? I have said in many posts I am bad at disease ID. Not from lack of research, but real world experience. Only thing I knew in the 80’s was ich since that was most prevalent to me.

If I was newer to salt water forums and did not follow QT and had an issue I would feel like I did something so wrong, or worse I am a moron. (That debate on me is still up in the air no comments please) I challenge you to go back and re-read some of the must QT posts that have been put up. When you re-read it, pretend you are the poster looking for help. My take away from these posts is... you must QT. How or why did you even put a fish in without QT. Sorry you got a disease, go fallow for 3,ooo,oo1 days. There is no other way and I am not going to offer alternatives.

Please, for the love of the guys and gals we love. Let’s look at how we come off to the newer keepers. How we move right to drugs and dosing. I have yet to see one disease thread that says, do copper but make sure you are addressing his diet to help his ammunition system.

If we always are following, and I have said before, (like basic programming computer years to go) if you always use an IF THEN GO TO approach ...where does innovation come into play see things like c+ programming and on.

That said I feel better, but I would like @Brew12 or even the mighty @Paul B to weigh in. If i overstepped my boundaries I will accept my punishment or privileges being revoked.

Oh, and this is also my longest post. I am no longer riled up. Thanks everyone, inspire the new and support us old. Keep peace alive

Something to think about, QT and treatment via medication is the only way to “eradicate” parasites in your tank. If you get ich or velvet and don’t treat it, even if you can fortify your fish enough with nutrition, and reduce the parasite numbers with UV, oxidizing,parasite predators, etc; the parasites will still be in your tank.

So, when someone is successful in parasite-management in their tank, they haven’t found an alternative “cure”... just a way to help their fish tolerate the existing parasites. So, saying QT/medicating is the only way to get rid of parasites isn’t really a stretch.

I’ve MANY times provided links to ich management articles and threads, to try to help someone if they can’t or won’t QT and are in crisis. I’ve also addressed nutrition many times as well, so have many others I’ve seen, especially with cases involving HLLE and bacterial issues. The only goal for me, is helping the fish the best way that I feel I can, in the order, in my own opinion, of what I think is most likely to save the fish.

Not every thread is an emergency, but many times by the time the issue has reached the disease forum... it’s beyond the issue of QT or not QT, or how much or how well you are feeding. If something isn’t done, they will die.

I commend you for what you are doing with managing ich in your tank, your purple tang does look better!

But, if you’d already lost half of your fish and the rest were breathing fast and covered in velvet..you’d be past the point of being able to manage the parasites. At that point, it’s a crisis... and in my personal experience... requires intervention.

I don’t think it’s fair to bash the disease forum team for offering advice on treating sick fish. There are many fish that have survived because of the advice we offer, too.

 

[MaccaPopEye]

If someone is willing to deal with the possibility of disease in their display, fine, they shouldn't QT.
It may burn itself out, whatever gets through. Maybe nothing will ever get through.
Only some of your fish might die. Perhaps even none. Or, you might lose 90%.
I'm not really a gambler.

I think that my biggest issue is even if you do QT and prophylactically treat ALL your fish, there is still a pretty decent chance (that is increasing all the time) that pathogens will still get into your display. And when they do the result is devastating as none of the fish have a built up immunity or resistance to it.

There is quite a few threads where people strictly QT everything - all fish with medication regardless of if they show signs of disease or not and all coral + inverts for a full fallow period. Yet they still end up with something bad in their display. If we assume they followed the process "properly" which I think is a fair assumption for most of them, how did the pathogens get there? Who knows? I think those people would have said they were not willing to deal with the possibility of getting a disease in their tank, yet they still did, the question is how to move forwards.

Apparently CI might be able to survive for way longer than the recommended fallow period & there appears to possibly be medication resistant parasites and diseases popping up. Not only are the current practices not working 100% of the time (even when they are done right), eventually they might not work at all. And what will you do then? Or what if, as in Canada, Australia & some of Europe some of the meds used to treat fish are hard or impossible to obtain?

What if you leave your display fallow for 1 year and still get CI when you reintroduce a fish that has gone through TTM because it digs up a dormant tomont in the sand?

Sure you can start a new, clean CI free tank and use TTM to ensure all of your fish are CI and velvet free and QT all coral in a separate fallow tank. But what if you introduce a coral that carries with it a tomont even after it's fallow period in QT? What if you have one, teeny tiny cross contamination accident (just a tiny drop of water on your arm that carries a pathogen with it)?

 

[drstardust]

I will weigh in and no, I don't think you overstepped.

I agree with much of what you have said. I do want people to consider something, We are all biased based on our experiences. A person who has not QT'd and had many fish losses but then started QT'ing and the fish losses were reduced will be passionate about recommending QT. A person who has had a lot of losses trying to QT but then had better luck while skipping it will be passionate against using QT. It is important to remember that we all have a common goal, and that is to be as good of stewards of the creatures in our care. We have become a very polarized society in general, and this is no different. We would all benefit from accepting people with different beliefs without thinking less of them as a person. The only way we will all ever feel the same way about any topic is if we have all had the same experiences and influences. That isn't going to happen. We can disagree and still respect those who think differently than we do.

Well said!
Caring for our animals properly is number one.
I will also add that at the end of the day, this is supposed to be fun. If we cannot enjoy it, then why do it? I don't think anyone enjoys going fallow for 76 days while putting their fish through harsh treatment if there are alternatives to this. And waiting that long for each coral and gosh darn snail that we add to our system? It can make the most patient reefer go totally crazy. If there is a better way, I'm all for it.

 

[ngoodermuth]

I find it hard to believe though, that just because a fish has been treated at some point for a disease, that it will never have a healthy enough immune system to protect it in the future.

So maybe my tank is crashing, fish are dying left and right and I have no choice but to try to save whatever I can.

So, I catch them... treat them, go fallow, and reintroduce the fish to my system. Maybe then I add a UV system as a preventative, and start looking into better foods for my fish. Maybe I buy a couple cleaner shrimp, and start feeding baby brine.

And maybe, eventually I do accidentally add another parasite to my tank. Except this time, I don’t even know it... because my system has improved, my fish are more healthy, and my tank is more mature. And I don’t even realize the parasite has been introduced.

Why can’t we both treat diseases AND bolster our tank health... just in case?

I still don’t trust the supply chain to supply me with healthy fish. I’ve seen first hand how bad it is... I wish I’d taken video footage of some of the fish during my last LFS visit.

But, I don’t think that just because my fish have been treated, they can never be fat and healthy or have any type of immune system again.

 

[drstardust]

Why can’t we both treat diseases AND bolster our tank health... just in case?

We can. This is what I try my best to do. And I get the feeling you do your best to do this too.

 

[Michael Gilbreath]

I think we all know this thread is not about bashing anybody its about trying to find a way that works for almost everybody. if it seems like were bashing anybody i'm sorry. But that is not what is where saying where trying to find a way that works incase diseases become resistant to meds or they become illegal. So if it seems were bashing again i'm sorry not are attention.

 

[MaccaPopEye]

I find it hard to believe though, that just because a fish has been treated at some point for a disease, that it will never have a healthy enough immune system to protect it in the future.

So maybe my tank is crashing, fish are dying left and right and I have no choice but to try to save whatever I can.

So, I catch them... treat them, go fallow, and reintroduce the fish to my system. Maybe then I add a UV system as a preventative, and start looking into better foods for my fish. Maybe I buy a couple cleaner shrimp, and start feeding baby brine.

And maybe, eventually I do accidentally add another parasite to my tank. Except this time, I don’t even know it... because my system has improved, my fish are more healthy, and my tank is more mature. And I don’t even realize the parasite has been introduced.

Why can’t we both treat diseases AND bolster our tank health... just in case?

I still don’t trust the supply chain to supply me with healthy fish. I’ve seen first hand how bad it is... I wish I’d taken video footage of some of the fish during my last LFS visit.

But, I don’t think that just because my fish have been treated, they can never be fat and healthy or have any type of immune system again.

I don't think they are mutually exclusive. There is worry about introducing a parasite carrying fish into a perfectly QT tank and vice versa (as there probably should be). But I don't think that just because a fish has been treated in the past means it needs to be written off.

Maybe there is ways that one might be able to migrate across to a tank with healthy fish that wont be effected by parasites.

While I don't QT, I do think an observation period is likely the best practice.

And keep in mind I haven't done this, so it is just a suggestion.

Lets say you want to add a fish that you know has been prophylactically treated for everything or maybe a fish that you removed to treat and is ready to go back into a tank that is full of pathogens and healthy fish. If you just drop it in then it may not do well.

I would suggest putting the fish into observation for a few weeks, and slowly start adding some water from the display. Slowly, a bit more water every few days until you are doing large water changes with water from your display. This would hopefully give you an indication of if the fish would react or not. From there you could put the fish in the sump for a couple of weeks and if all is still well then you can move it to the display?

I don't know if it would work but maybe if there was a separate forum for this kind of method we could ask a few people to try it out?

 

[ngoodermuth]

I don't think they are mutually exclusive. There is worry about introducing a parasite carrying fish into a perfectly QT tank and vice versa (as there probably should be). But I don't think that just because a fish has been treated in the past means it needs to be written off.

Maybe there is ways that one might be able to migrate across to a tank with healthy fish that wont be effected by parasites.

While I don't QT, I do think an observation period is likely the best practice.

And keep in mind I haven't done this, so it is just a suggestion.

Lets say you want to add a fish that you know has been prophylactically treated for everything or maybe a fish that you removed to treat and is ready to go back into a tank that is full of pathogens and healthy fish. If you just drop it in then it may not do well.

I would suggest putting the fish into observation for a few weeks, and slowly start adding some water from the display. Slowly, a bit more water every few days until you are doing large water changes with water from your display. This would hopefully give you an indication of if the fish would react or not. From there you could put the fish in the sump for a couple of weeks and if all is still well then you can move it to the display?

I don't know if it would work but maybe if there was a separate forum for this kind of method we could ask a few people to try it out?

I’ve actually brought up a similar idea when discussing ich-management with someone. They were living with ich, but still wanted to QT new additions to prevent velvet, brook, and uronema.

I thought QT like you would normally to start, then during the observation period “spike” the QT by adding a piece of LR from the sump to give the fish a chance to acclimate to the ich without stress from competition in the main tank. Like a reverse QT.

Or, can just throw it in your sump like @Lasse... same basic idea, just adding a separate QT to the front end of the process to help avoid the “worse” ones.

 

[MaccaPopEye]

I’ve actually brought up a similar idea when discussing ich-management with someone. They were living with ich, but still wanted to QT new additions to prevent velvet, brook, and uronema.

I thought QT like you would normally to start, then during the observation period “spike” the QT by adding a piece of LR from the sump to give the fish a chance to acclimate to the ich without stress from competition in the main tank. Like a reverse QT.

Or, can just throw it in your sump like @Lasse... same basic idea, just adding a separate QT to the front end of the process to help avoid the “worse” ones.

Exactly. I think a mix of both a separate "acclimation / observation" tank and isolation / more acclimation in the sump is possibly the best until we know more.

If you can start feeding good, bacteria rich foods (DIY mixes or LRS etc.) while they are in a separate tank and slowly introduce any parasites (CI, velvet etc.) then you give the fish a fighting chance to get used to it and build up their adaptive immunity.

Worst case scenario the fish can't build up it's immunity then you may be able to intervene if things get bad and still treat the fish in its separate tank (I don't know what the best way forward may be then though). But if it all appears to go well then adding the fish to the sump before the display may still help with aggression etc. as Lassie has an interesting hypothesis that the fish all get used to each others "smells" through water circulation so when a fish moves from the sump to the display everyone is already used to having them around.

 

[Mortie31]

So, when someone is successful in parasite-management in their tank, they haven’t found an alternative “cure”... just a way to help their fish tolerate the existing parasites.

Isn’t this what happens in nature? The parasites are always there, just in numbers that are asymptomatic...

 

[Sallstrom]

If everyone had a observation quarantine tank like this, I'm pretty sure most fish would survive and gain good health before moved into a display tank

It's a quarantine/holding tank at a Danish aquarium.

I want to try to contribute more in this subject if I can. Just need to find some time to check some old notes and then have time to write about them. I'm following this thread but having trouble keeping up, there's a lot of posts!

Thanks again @Brew12 for bringing this subject up!

 

[Brew12]

I find it hard to believe though, that just because a fish has been treated at some point for a disease, that it will never have a healthy enough immune system to protect it in the future.

So maybe my tank is crashing, fish are dying left and right and I have no choice but to try to save whatever I can.

So, I catch them... treat them, go fallow, and reintroduce the fish to my system. Maybe then I add a UV system as a preventative, and start looking into better foods for my fish. Maybe I buy a couple cleaner shrimp, and start feeding baby brine.

And maybe, eventually I do accidentally add another parasite to my tank. Except this time, I don’t even know it... because my system has improved, my fish are more healthy, and my tank is more mature. And I don’t even realize the parasite has been introduced.

Why can’t we both treat diseases AND bolster our tank health... just in case?

I still don’t trust the supply chain to supply me with healthy fish. I’ve seen first hand how bad it is... I wish I’d taken video footage of some of the fish during my last LFS visit.

But, I don’t think that just because my fish have been treated, they can never be fat and healthy or have any type of immune system again.

Agree completely. We know that fish treated with copper for Ich can still gain an immunity to it. It was done for one of the studies I've seen on immune response. A ground of naïve fish was taken and divided into groups. To create an immune group to test they exposed the fish to parasites and then treated them with copper before the fish could be overwhelmed. They showed a strong enough immune response after the 2nd exposure that most would have survived but they were treated with copper a 3rd time to begin testing with no parasites on the fish.

This particular study resonated with me. The scientists used copper to limit parasite numbers to create ich resistant fish. It's something most of us can't do at home as I don't keep a culture of ich to use. Other studies have been done by flushing water through the fishes tank to remove parasites and others have used TTM. If our goal at home is to create immune fish in a reliable manner, how do we keep parasite numbers down low enough for the fish to survive during the process without completely eradicating the parasite? Is this even possible with Brook or Uronema? Is it important for those 2? No idea....

 

[Brew12]

If everyone had a observation quarantine tank like this, I'm pretty sure most fish would survive and gain good health before moved into a display tank

It's a quarantine/holding tank at a Danish aquarium.

I want to try to contribute more in this subject if I can. Just need to find some time to check some old notes and then have time to write about them. I'm following this thread but having trouble keeping up, there's a lot of posts!

Thanks again @Brew12 for bringing this subject up!

If I had an observation tank like that I would be divorced!!!

 

[Brew12]

Isn’t this what happens in nature? The parasites are always there, just in numbers that are asymptomatic...

I think we have a communication issue. Can a "healthy" fish be a carrier of parasites? I feel the answer is yes. If a person is defining a healthy fish as "parasite free" then a fish that hasn't been QT'd can not be healthy.

Maybe I need to make this a focus of a separate conversation. I'm realizing I should have taken this one on earlier. If the goal is "healthy fish" but we have different conceptions on what "healthy" means we cannot communicate clearly. Poor communication leads to misunderstanding and frustration. It seems clear we are not communicating well.

I'll add this on to my ever growing to-do list.

 

[Michael Gilbreath]

I agree what defines a health fish what I see as health might not be the same as what you see. And I think we will open another can of worms with deciding this lol.

 

[Paul B]

I just read another thread like many before. “You must QT”

This is not an easy answer and it is in what I like to say, "The Fusion Zone". If you have a brand new tank with dry rock and ASW your fish will get sick even if your brother is Saint Peter. New tanks with new rocks with new ASW used by a Noob will have problems, there is no way around it. Sorry Noobs but thats the way it is. Bacteria need quite a bit of time to do what we pay them for and a Noob does also.

So If I were to start a tank like that, I would fill it up (cycle it very good with something dead but not your cat or the fur will clog the filter) and get some fish. Not $300.00 tangs, coelacanths, manta rays etc. But maybe wrasses, gobies, bleenies, cardinals etc. I would then treat them in copper.
Yes I know, I am totally against medication but this is for a brand new tank with a Noob. 11 or 12 days in the recommended dose of copper then put them in that new tank. Their immunity from the sea would still be intact but the fish will feel under the weather (or under the water as the fish will say) and maybe have an upset stomach like when you drank to much at your first wedding.

If you did that correctly, your fish should not have parasites, or if they do, the parasites will also be under the weather.
You need to get all the dry food, pellets and freeze dried food you have, find your garbage can and throw it in there, don't use it no matter how pretty the angelfish is on the box.

Get LRS frozen Reef Frenzy and some big fresh live clams from a Supermarket or live worms, either black or white, they don't consider race a thing. Even earthworms.
Take the clams and throw them in the freezer. In 2 days open them up and shave off paper thin slices to feed the fish. Your tank is new, there is no bacteria so it may cloud the water a "little".
That is fine and if it is a little, it will clear. If your glass looks like 3 day old wax paper that you wrapped your happy meal in, change a lot of water. Increase circulation no matter what you do.

The cloudyness is just a bacterial bloom which is actually good. The fish may not like it but they have to get over it because if they don't like it, they should have run away from that collector.

The bacteria are floating around looking for a place to call home and start a family so we need this.

If the fish get some spots, I would just hope they get better. If they get a lot of spots I would throw them back in that copper because you didn't monitor that first copper dose well enough. (I told you you will have problems)

After a while when the water clears, the fish seem healthy, you notice some growth like algae, cyano, Godzilla Larvae etc. that is good. Add some more fish using the copper.

In time, maybe 6 months of feeding that food I mentioned, add more fish one at a time with (no copper). Don't worry about a few spots, that is actually good because if you followed this, your fish will be immune.

But if you used dry food pasta or pellets, I will know about it so don't blame me when you have to go on the disease forum saying something like "OMG" I followed that Jiboni Paul B's advice and my fish got so sick I had to call 3 paramedics and they are now being airlifted to the Mayo Clinic for MRIs.

You can continue to use copper for new fish, but I would not advise that because with no parasites, the fish will lose their immunity to them.

 

[Sallstrom]

I think we have a communication issue. Can a "healthy" fish be a carrier of parasites? I feel the answer is yes. If a person is defining a healthy fish as "parasite free" then a fish that hasn't been QT'd can not be healthy.

Maybe I need to make this a focus of a separate conversation. I'm realizing I should have taken this one on earlier. If the goal is "healthy fish" but we have different conceptions on what "healthy" means we cannot communicate clearly. Poor communication leads to misunderstanding and frustration. It seems clear we are not communicating well.

I'll add this on to my ever growing to-do list.

This tang for example has been at the museum since 2004. Sometimes you can see parasites on it, sometimes not. I consider it healthy since it looks healthy and acts happy(not shy, always hungry). Is it healthy or not to you?!

 

[WVNed]

There seems to be an unnatural fear or parasites and "pests" these days. You see it in many of the posts. Do I kill it?

There are now a whole host of drugs you can give your dog to prevent fleas, ticks and heart worms. I don't use those either. If we get a flea I deal with it and use the drugs but I do not keep them on it all of the time. I do not fill the yard with pesticides trying to kill them either.
I have a bunch of dogs too.

A healthy animal is one that can function in it's normal environment for it's normal lifespan.
I do not know If I am good enough to accomplish that but it is my goal.

 

[atoll]

I think people are confusing healthy as opposed to infection. Apparently we all have cancer within us if so does that make us unhealthy? IMO and FWIW I don't consider the fact a fish may have the odd parasite unhealthy far from it. The fact the fish has a few parasites but in all other respects is in good health swimming eating good colour and normal behaviour means it's able to deal with parasites to the point the fish is not overwhelmed by them. Like Paul B I am sure there are various parasites and diseases lurking in my tank waiting an opportunity to explode but the fact my fish are healthy prevents such an event taking place. I firmly believe the way I keep my fish keeps them in good health. A fish might look healthy displaying some if not all of the above and yet break out in a bad infestation of itch or whatever. Now that is what I would call an unhealthy fish to begin with. If I see a spot or 2 in any of my fish which may happen from time to time with my Royal grammas for instance I just let it run it's course, no need to panic like some and certainly no need for any form of medication. I have been keeping my fish my way for over 30 years now and disease has never been an issue and I am talking never QTd and with about 10 tanks in that time from nanos to 130 gallons.