Does Prime actually "Detoxify" free ammonia, NH3?

[MnFish1]

How would they know the difference between interference and a true reduced level?

How would the experiments here determine that? Thats the point.

It has been said here - a couple times - that the Seneye would be the perfect instrument for the tests done here (the gold standard - so to speak) because of the way they measure free Ammonia.

The manufacturer of the instrument says it's not reliable in the presence of Prime for 24 hours. The answers I received from Seneye and Seachem do not bolster (or not) the claims of what (if anything) Prime does to ammonia. But - they do suggest that the experimental design(s) here may be flawed.

 

[DrZoidburg]

Got a bit crazy here and there with some assumptions I must admit. I have however been saying this all along. Boogered test prove nothing.

IMPLIES that there are not 1 but 2 ingredients

I think this also. Plus msds from the beginning has been from what I saw from 2006-2008. It is possible the made reformulations. Also it is possible that they bought the rights to use another formula. This they would not have to tell us.

How would they know the difference between interference and a true reduced level?

Not seneyes problem. Only that it causes interference. I think it cause of said earlier in another thread. Its working around the nitrogen molecule, and calibrated to read for NH3. I wonder if this interference is the case with prime and ammonia, or just with prime.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Not seneyes problem. Only that it causes interference. I think it cause of said earlier in another thread. Its working around the nitrogen molecule, and calibrated to read for NH3. I wonder if this interference is the case with prime and ammonia, or just with prime.

There's no information from Seneye or anyone else that says there is an incorrect reading when using Prime. That is your interpretation based on no knowledge of the composition of Prime.

 

[DrZoidburg]

There's no information from Seneye or anyone else that says there is an incorrect reading when using Prime. That is your interpretation based on no knowledge of the composition of Prime.

Nor any that says a correct reading.

 

[MnFish1]

There's no information from Seneye or anyone else that says there is an incorrect reading when using Prime. That is your interpretation based on no knowledge of the composition of Prime.

Randy - Maybe I'm not clear on what you're saying - Call technical support - its an international number - and you can't use Skype.

Seneye technical support SAYS - the results are unreliable using PRIME and the SENEYE. I called them myself. So - I'm not sure how you say 'there is no information from Seneye or anyone else that says there is an incorrect reading when using PRIME'. To me incorrect - and unreliable are about as synonymous as it can get? The way it was explained to me is that PRIME specifically was one of the chemicals in their testing that can affect readings. Perhaps I misunderstood - but the woman I spoke with spoke excellent English - and it was a phone number from England

 

[MnFish1]

PS - if you look on the Seneye WEBSITE - it says in an answer from 2013 - that PRIME should NOT affect ammonia. So - I can't explain the discrepancy between what was said today and 2013.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

PS - if you look on the Seneye WEBSITE - it says in an answer from 2013 - that PRIME should NOT affect ammonia. So - I can't explain the discrepancy between what was said today and 2013.

I can. It's one of the two possible interpretations of what Seneye wrote that I posted above.

The recent statement just means that, in their opinion, the reported levels are lower because Prime "binds" it, but Prime binding is temporary (by all accounts including Seachem), so Seneye interprets that to mean it is not a true reading because it will come up again.

 

[MnFish1]

I can. It's one of the two possible interpretations of what Seneye wrote that I posted above.

The recent statement just means that, in their opinion, the reported levels are lower because Prime "binds" it, but Prime binding is temporary (by all accounts including Seachem), so Seneye interprets that to mean it is not a true reading because it will come up again.

AH - but then this also 'contradicts' the seneye experiments done here - which showed no change in ammonia with the Seneye. But - again to be clear - I did not ask about whether the seneye measures lower or higher with Prime - Only - is it reliable. Another thread from 2017 - which is almost as long as this one (done in a freshwater pond) showed conflicting results based on pH, temp, and when they added Prime to a sample containing free ammonia (measured by Seneye) - the ammonia went up 10 percent or so - there was a lot of debate back and forth as to why this might have happened. It SEEMS to my reading most people talked about accuracy of the meter at extremely high or low levels, as well as the possibility that Ammonia bound to Prime is indeed measured by a Seneye - just not in a 1:1 ratio

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

AH - but then this also 'contradicts' the seneye experiments done here - which showed no change in ammonia with the Seneye. But - again to be clear - I did not ask about whether the seneye measures lower or higher with Prime - Only - is it reliable. Another thread from 2017 - which is almost as long as this one (done in a freshwater pond) showed conflicting results based on pH, temp, and when they added Prime to a sample containing free ammonia (measured by Seneye) - the ammonia went up 10 percent or so - there was a lot of debate back and forth as to why this might have happened. It SEEMS to my reading most people talked about accuracy of the meter at extremely high or low levels, as well as the possibility that Ammonia bound to Prime is indeed measured by a Seneye - just not in a 1:1 ratio

Which is why I said to take Seneye's comments with the understanding that they do not likely know anything about what is happening on a molecular level, and may just be expressing opinions based on Seachem's claim that it is "bound". They may not have measured the effect of Prime themselves.

 

[MnFish1]

Which is why I said to take Seneye's comments with the understanding that they do not likely know anything about what is happening on a molecular level, and may just be expressing opinions based on Seachem's claim that it is "bound". They may not have measured the effect of Prime themselves.

You might be correct. That is not the way I read what she said, because it was in the context of what can cause erroneous/unreliable measurments. But if even Seneye doesn't understand whats happening on a molecular level how can we hobbyists doing home experiments hope to do so (i.e. know which tests will work, etc)?

 

[Dan_P]

I'm saying you're wrong because you're not saying 'their claims are probably not true', you're saying point blank 'prime does not detoxify ammonia'. Based on what I've learned from Seachem and Seneye, the most I get out of the experiments are their claims 'might not be true or 'might be exaggerated', but given the limitations of the testing you guys did I'm not sure you can realistically say even that.

Saying we are wrong because we said “is” and not “probably is” seems odd given your acceptance of Seachem claims without any data at all. We will have to call this one a draw.

So - I'll say it again. I like the idea of the experiments, they are an interesting discussion point, they MAY suggest that some of the claims by Seachem are not correct (or exaggerations, etc). But just because as you state above you are 'providing the best evidence we have of that position' - that does not make the thesis correct.

We both understand how the scientific process works and how a hypothesis is never really proven. Our data was so clear cut, we felt justified in saying Prime does not detoxify ammonia. Seachem links concentration reduction of ammonia to detoxification of ammonia. If ammonia concentration is not reduced, detoxification does not happen. We really do not need to test fish, just ammonia concentration.

When Seneye themselves state - in response to this specific question that I asked (I did not mention Prime): "Are there any chemicals/additives that can affect the Seneye monitor like antibiotics, water conditioners, etc?" and the answer is : "Anything that can color the water like malachite green, anything corrosive, like Chlorine, and PRIME because of the way it binds ammonia". To me this negates the Seneye experiments with Prime - wouldn't that make sense to you?

This is is a tiny bit deceptive. Depending on the tech support person you get, the answer may vary. With regard to the query about “ammonia concentration did not change when Prime is added”, the tech person’s response is ”we don’t know what is in Prime and cannot comment.”

I calibrated three Seneye slides and they stayed in calibration during the four weeks that I used them. Prime did not effect accuracy nor precision. If there was an effect it had to be temporary. Since the measured about of free ammonia during the experiment with Prime was the same as the calculated free ammonia based on the amount of the reference standard I added, the pH and temperature, I conclude that the Seneye colorimetric film stayed in calibration. The other unlikely scenario is that Prime reduced the ammonia level but the Prime molecule with ammonia attached effected the Seneye film exactly like ammonia.

I then asked "Can high ammonia levels cause errors in measurement?" She said "Yes at levels (I believe) above .0499" it may not be reliable - especially for longer periods of time.

OK, more misleading information. The calibration curve of the Seneye colorimetric film is not linear over large concentration ranges, but it is reproducible. The film is not harmed over several hours at elevated ammonia levels. The concentration of total ammonia I worked with rarely gave free ammonia above 0.03 ppm

I will let you know when I get more information (than already posted) concerning the Seachem free ammonia tests.

I calibrated the Seachem Alert badge and found it to behave well with the conditions of our experiments. It too showed that Prime does not reduce the concentration of ammonia. Seachem advises customers to use these films to see Prime in action. Ooops

 

[Dan_P]

You might be correct. That is not the way I read what she said, because it was in the context of what can cause erroneous/unreliable measurments. But if even Seneye doesn't understand whats happening on a molecular level how can we hobbyists doing home experiments hope to do so (i.e. know which tests will work, etc)?

Maybe some hobbyist are scientists. Just sayin’

 

[Lasse]

Maybe some hobbyist are scientists. Just sayin’

Or the other way around

Excuse me - could not stop myself not to do that comment

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

Saying we are wrong because we said “is” and not “probably is” seems odd given your acceptance of Seachem claims without any data at all. We will have to call this one a draw.

You're misquoting what I said. On a couple levels - so I'll say it again.

1. I never said I believed Seachem's claims - except that it dechlorinates. All I said is that your experiments in my opinion do not negate Seachem's other claims about detoxifying ammonia. I never said per se that I 'believed' everything or anything Seachem said.
2. When you're talking about an product on a message board - which thousands of people use - if not many more - IMHO, there is a huge difference in saying
'XXX might not or probably doesnt) work based on our experiements' as compared to saying 'XXXX doesn't work'. See below

Our data was so clear cut, we felt justified in saying Prime does not detoxify ammonia. Seachem links concentration reduction of ammonia to detoxification of ammonia. If ammonia concentration is not reduced, detoxification does not happen.

This can't be stated with any kind of surety - except that its your opinion. Because - it depends on the tests used - and whether they are really measuring what you think they are measuring. This is with Prime or any other 'product'. IMHO - to make this claim with the surety you are, you would need laboratory grade equipment and much better controlled experiments. (Though again I applaud you for doing them)

This is is a tiny bit deceptive. Depending on the tech support person you get, the answer may vary. With regard to the query about “ammonia concentration did not change when Prime is added”, the tech person’s response is ”we don’t know what is in Prime and cannot comment.”

Except - Unless I misphrased something - I don't believe I ever used the words you used above and if I did - it is more evidence against your method - as compared to evidence for your method. The question I asked are "Are there any chemicals that render the Seneye unreliable (paraphrased)". She listed Prime among others. She never mentioned to me what results they received to make that statement. I.e. that ammonia levels didn't change. If you're talking about Seachem, Seachem said that under the proper testing conditions (like the ammonia level and pH of a typical aquarium), there should be a drop in free ammonia with the alert badge and their other multi-test kit.

I calibrated the Seachem Alert badge and found it to behave well with the conditions of our experiments. It too showed that Prime does not reduce the concentration of ammonia. Seachem advises customers to use these films to see Prime in action. Ooops

Yes - thats why I have an email in to the lab director. Which - frankly, is something in all fairness, perhaps you should have done as well i.e. after getting the results but before posting the thread? And I know you said you emailed them, and they also acknowledged receiving questions about this before - without going Into details.

PS - You cannot link an in vitro result 'ammonia level' with an in vivo claim, in my opinion. The word detoxify does not mean remove, and from Seachem's website - the very strong implication is that there is a dechlorinating chemical - and another one that binds ammonia reversibly. Is that true? I dont know. Maybe I'm just splitting hairs - BUT - perhaps your results more suggest 'Prime does not appear to lower Free ammonia in a manner that is suggested on the Seachem website". I do not think the amphipod experiment shows conclusively - that Prime does not 'detoxify' ammonia in vivo.

 

[MnFish1]

Maybe some hobbyist are scientists. Just sayin’

well - since I have multiple years including a graduate degree in 'science' - I would guess I could be considered a 'scientist'. Right? With 20 or so years designing clinical trials... There are a lot of things that happen 'in vitro' that do not happen 'in vivo'

 

[Dan_P]

Or the other way around

Excuse me - could not stop myself not to do that comment

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Dan_P]

You're misquoting what I said. On a couple levels - so I'll say it again.

1. I never said I believed Seachem's claims - except that it dechlorinates. All I said is that your experiments in my opinion do not negate Seachem's other claims about detoxifying ammonia. I never said per se that I 'believed' everything or anything Seachem said.
2. When you're talking about an product on a message board - which thousands of people use - if not many more - IMHO, there is a huge difference in saying
'XXX might not or probably doesnt) work based on our experiements' as compared to saying 'XXXX doesn't work'. See below

This can't be stated with any kind of surety - except that its your opinion. Because - it depends on the tests used - and whether they are really measuring what you think they are measuring. This is with Prime or any other 'product'. IMHO - to make this claim with the surety you are, you would need laboratory grade equipment and much better controlled experiments. (Though again I applaud you for doing them)

Except - Unless I misphrased something - I don't believe I ever used the words you used above and if I did - it is more evidence against your method - as compared to evidence for your method. The question I asked are "Are there any chemicals that render the Seneye unreliable (paraphrased)". She listed Prime among others. She never mentioned to me what results they received to make that statement. I.e. that ammonia levels didn't change. If you're talking about Seachem, Seachem said that under the proper testing conditions (like the ammonia level and pH of a typical aquarium), there should be a drop in free ammonia with the alert badge and their other multi-test kit.

Yes - thats why I have an email in to the lab director. Which - frankly, is something in all fairness, perhaps you should have done as well i.e. after getting the results but before posting the thread? And I know you said you emailed them, and they also acknowledged receiving questions about this before - without going Into details.

PS - You cannot link an in vitro result 'ammonia level' with an in vivo claim, in my opinion. The word detoxify does not mean remove, and from Seachem's website - the very strong implication is that there is a dechlorinating chemical - and another one that binds ammonia reversibly. Is that true? I dont know. Maybe I'm just splitting hairs - BUT - perhaps your results more suggest 'Prime does not appear to lower Free ammonia in a manner that is suggested on the Seachem website". I do not think the amphipod experiment shows conclusively - that Prime does not 'detoxify' ammonia in vivo.

I am wondering if we might have reached the end of a productive discussion. What do you think?

 

[threebuoys]

You're misquoting what I said. On a couple levels - so I'll say it again.

1. I never said I believed Seachem's claims - except that it dechlorinates. All I said is that your experiments in my opinion do not negate Seachem's other claims about detoxifying ammonia. I never said per se that I 'believed' everything or anything Seachem said.
2. When you're talking about an product on a message board - which thousands of people use - if not many more - IMHO, there is a huge difference in saying
'XXX might not or probably doesnt) work based on our experiements' as compared to saying 'XXXX doesn't work'. See below

This can't be stated with any kind of surety - except that its your opinion. Because - it depends on the tests used - and whether they are really measuring what you think they are measuring. This is with Prime or any other 'product'. IMHO - to make this claim with the surety you are, you would need laboratory grade equipment and much better controlled experiments. (Though again I applaud you for doing them)

I've followed this and the other thread intently over the past few days. I've read what you've said and I beleive I understand where you are coming from to a point.

The question for you that comes to my mind is;
If a new hobbyist who is trying to do everything right comes to you and says "I'm trying to stock my medicine kit so I'm prepared for any calamity that's likely to occur. My LFS has recommended that I buy Prime and keep it on hand so if I have a problem with ammonia, I can use it to solve my problem. What is your advice?" , how would you respond to him?

 

[MnFish1]

I am wondering if we might have reached the end of a productive discussion. What do you think?

yes - If you refuse to document your results with either company (Seneye - or Seachem) - and then post the results - we have. But that aside - there are numerous holes in your theory - whether you admit it or not.

 

[MnFish1]

I've followed this and the other thread intently over the past few days. I've read what you've said and I beleive I understand where you are coming from to a point.

The question for you that comes to my mind is;
If a new hobbyist who is trying to do everything right comes to you and says "I'm trying to stock my medicine kit so I'm prepared for any calamity that's likely to occur. My LFS has recommended that I buy Prime and keep it on hand so if I have a problem with ammonia, I can use it to solve my problem. What is your advice?" , how would you respond to him?

I would respond - 1. Avoid that situation - in the first place. 2. If you have a perceived ammonia situation - figure out the cause. 3. I would do (as I already stated at least a couple times) - large water changes - and would probably add bottled bacteria. 4. In the meantime - I would add an ammonia detoxifyer (pick your brand) I dont care. None have been proven or disproven,