Lies About Cyanide

BRS
Jump to Last
eatbreakfast

eatbreakfast

Fish Nerd
View Badges
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
14,837
Reaction score
16,244
Location
CT
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm not saying cyanide isn't used to catch fish in some parts of the world. And where it is used, it does need to be stopped. But anti-aquarium activists, most notably Renee Umberger and her organization For the Fishes, have waged a campaign to paint "99% of aquarium fish caught with cyanide". You can easily see how pervasive they have been when doing a quick search about cyanide and aquarium fish. Ranging from news sites, National Geographic, to Wikipedia. However, if you notice the references, there is no sound data given.

A couple of years ago For the Fishes presented at a scientific conference a study to support these numbers. They said they hadn't had time to get it peer reviewed prior to the conference, but were going to have it peer reviewed. It turns out that the results don't actually add up.

https://www.reef2rainforest.com/201...s-that-debunk-cyanide-test-for-aquarium-fish/

Bravo Renee Umberger! You are very effective at presenting the aquarium hobby in a negative light. Too bad it is based on lies and presented by someone morally bankrupt.
 
eatbreakfast said:
I'm not saying cyanide isn't used to catch fish in some parts of the world. And where it is used, it does need to be stopped. But anti-aquarium activists, most notably Renee Umberger and her organization For the Fishes, have waged a campaign to paint "99% of aquarium fish caught with cyanide". You can easily see how pervasive they have been when doing a quick search about cyanide and aquarium fish. Ranging from news sites, National Geographic, to Wikipedia. However, if you notice the references, there is no sound data given.

A couple of years ago For the Fishes presented at a scientific conference a study to support these numbers. They said they hadn't had time to get it peer reviewed prior to the conference, but were going to have it peer reviewed. It turns out that the results don't actually add up.

https://www.reef2rainforest.com/201...s-that-debunk-cyanide-test-for-aquarium-fish/

Bravo Renee Umberger! You are very effective at presenting the aquarium hobby in a negative light. Too bad it is based on lies and presented by someone morally bankrupt.
Click to expand...

So many things are done based on lies. This is infuriating. Thanks for the post/links! It’s good to be in the know so we don’t mistakenly perpetuate this to add to the demise of our hobby.
 
Way of our world. Some people that are miserable in their own life just want to cause misery for others. This is a prime example of it.
 
So the cyanide test does not work and provides negative results. Then all the fish should be tested cyanide free. Well...
 
Here's an updated article: https://www.reef2rainforest.com/2018/06/06/national-geographic-investigates-cyanide-test-results/

From my way of thinking, there are two possibilities to consider:
  1. The researchers at the University of Aveiro, Portugal falsified data in order to push an agenda (to hurt the aquarium trade).
  2. This new study is a "hit job" on the original 2012 paper; meant to discredit the cyanide testing protocol. Maybe someone in the aquarium industry with deep pockets funded the new study??
Whatever the case, this is just another example of the world we now live in. The lines between fact & fiction have never been more blurred, and who knows what to really believe anymore? :confused:
 
Top Shelf Aquatics
There is a discussion on FB with Matthew Pederson, Ret Talbot, Bob Fenner, one of the authors of this paper and one of the authors of the original paper.

The author of the previous paper contends that since different species were used is why the results couldn't be replicated and is going to publish further works supporting the original paper. Interestingly, he was one of the reviewers for the second paper.

Unfortunately, this discrepancy slows down any real, in the field testing.

Curiously though Bobby, I was wondering to myself that with some of the fish you have been seeing come in with no outward symptoms, but have velvet confirmed after necropsy, if many people who are vaguely aware of cyanide use, mistakenly diagnose symptomless(at least to the untrained eye)death to cyanide.
 
Wow good post a great thing to bring up. Today it is very hard to tell what is fact and what is fiction. Years ago cyanide was fairly common. some fish lived some died but shipping was also an issue back then too, there was no such thing as over night shipping. I have friends in the Philippines one that sometimes dives to supplement his income he will sometimes catch fish. He doesn't use cyanide and he says today he has not seen it in use for many years. 10 or more years ago the Philippine reefs did not look so good. My friend took me diving 2 years ago and the reefs looked pretty good. We did not dive where most of the tourists dive. I know years ago i have bought many fish that were cyanide caught. Tiday they don't really seem like that is the case anymore
 
Triton Lab is developing (it can already be in work) a method for testing cyanid content in packing water. It will be a great tool to use in order to sort out which exporters that allow their fishermens to use this methods.

IMO - this is not a common problem the last 10 years at least. The last 10 years I have helped a friend every time when he get imports from different exporters in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and one from the Philippines - We talking about receiving at least 20 000 pcs of different fishes and species during this time. During this time - it was not possible to exclude cyanid maybe 2 or 3 times with a few fishes it the actual delivery and this happens at least 5 years ago.

Sincerely Lasse
 
Avast
eatbreakfast said:
Curiously though Bobby, I was wondering to myself that with some of the fish you have been seeing come in with no outward symptoms, but have velvet confirmed after necropsy, if many people who are vaguely aware of cyanide use, mistakenly diagnose symptomless(at least to the untrained eye)death to cyanide.
Click to expand...

I’ve also had fish in QT just drop dead (eating/acting fine the day before), and no parasites/worms/infections were present on them or inside their gills. When this happens and I next open the fish up, most of the time I find that all of the internal organs look normal except the liver: https://www.researchgate.net/profil...the-Philippines.pdf?origin=publication_detail

But what I cannot say is whether the liver is being damaged by some of the medications I am using, or previous exposure to cyanide or ammonia. I am trying to learn more about how to take biopsies and examine cells/tissue. Not enough hours in the day unfortunately... o_O
 
Humblefish said:
This new study is a "hit job" on the original 2012 paper; meant to discredit the cyanide testing protocol. Maybe someone in the aquarium industry with deep pockets funded the new study??
Click to expand...

I think this is a rather unfair comment . Why should any with "deep pockets" want to discredit a working cyanide testing protocol. The one that can have a favour of using cyanide has no deep pockets - all others in the industry have not any favours by the use of cyanide - fish die in the collecting facilities, during the transport, at the importer, at the LFS and in some cases at an aquarists home. Everyone from the fish exporters to us aquarist will be favoured of a simple test protocol.​

I do not think that the researchers from Portugal falsified any data either - the different results can be caused of different methods. The key factor in this case is - IMO - how much and during which circumstances do the fish pee? Normally - salt water species do not pee very much.

Sincerely Lasse
 
Lasse said:
I think this is a rather unfair comment . Why should any with "deep pockets" want to discredit a working cyanide testing protocol. The one that can have a favour of using cyanide has no deep pockets - all others in the industry have not any favours by the use of cyanide - fish die in the collecting facilities, during the transport, at the importer, at the LFS and in some cases at an aquarists home. Everyone from the fish exporters to us aquarist will be favoured of a simple test protocol.​

I do not think that the researchers from Portugal falsified any data either - the different results can be caused of different methods. The key factor in this case is - IMO - how much and during which circumstances do the fish pee? Normally - salt water species do not pee very much.
Click to expand...

I think most wholesalers don’t want to know if a collector is using cyanide. The fish would usually be long gone from their hands before it died of cyanide poisoning. However, if a reliable test existed then one could make the argument that wholesalers should be testing for thiocyanate right in the bag of fish they receive from collectors. Not every bag (impractical), but at least random testing and testing of species which supposedly are oft caught using cyanide (e.g. chromis damsels). A wholesale facility would be best positioned to do this, because most likely thiocyanate would still be present in the bag water from their urine. By the time the fish makes it’s way to a LFS or hobbyist, one would expect any thiocyanate would be washed out. (This is all assuming that the thiocyanate methodology is even still accurate.)

For a wholesaler, testing for cyanide is all downside. And they would only do it if enough pressure were brought to bear. Not only would it add additional cost for a problem they care nothing about because it does not directly impact their business; but what do you do about the collectors who get caught using cyanide?? If the day ever comes where we are able to truly separate “scrupulous collectors” from “cyanide collectors”, expect to pay a lot more for fish from the former. Time is money, and collectors get paid by how many fish they are able to catch & ship out. If it takes longer to catch fish by using only proper techniques, the fish will cost more and that will have to be absorbed by everyone in the supply chain. And nobody in the industry wants to hear that, because many already feel prices are too high and that’s hurting their business.

So ask yourself: If the thiocyanate methodology was true & accurate; then from purely a business perspective, why wouldn’t you want to discredit it if possible? It would be akin to a chemical company wanting to squash a study which said their product(s) were harmful. Or the electric company wanting to discredit a study suggesting power lines were responsible for cancer...
 
Nutramar Foods
In your opinion - How long time does it take for a fish collected in a rural area of Indonesia or Philippines before it 1) arrive to a wholesaler in Europe or US. 2) Leave the wholesaler and end up in a LFS 3) leave the LFS and up in an aquarium. Also in your opinion - when start the degration of the liver after exposure of cyanid?

IMO - the problem with death of fishes caught with Cyanid starts already at the export station therefore - its a problem for the whole industry

In Europe - all large wholesales of living stock are members of OFI and follow OFI:s agenda - what it say - you can read here. OFI had publish a lot of very good books - The OFI educational publication series.

Looking at the member list - I can see that there are few US members even if the market it much larger in the US compared with Europe

If you with Chromis Damsel means Chromis viridis - I do not understand what you mean. This species is a schooling species as young and my friend have had thousands of this species passing his LFS through the years - no one never ever showing any sign of Cyanid poising or suddenly death not connecting with a microorganism induced illness. He always order fishes in the size of 3-4 cm. Why should you catch a schooling fish with Cyanid ? Never heard about Cast Nets?

I think that the industry of Europe would welcome a easy test for cyanid - at least - we will be rid of this rumors showing up now and then.

In R2R - I have seen a lot of question and reports of dead fishes. Both illness induced by microorganisms and suddenly deaths. IMO - this is not as common in Europe - why.

I do not know why this differences exist - but what I know is that illness in fishes induced by microorganisms often is related with stress - of one or another type. I also know that must drugs (including Cu) is metabolized by the liver - sometimes inducing co-systems of enzymes that produce metabolites that harm the liver.

Let me say - I would never ever use prophylactic treatment of any fish. I will use some medications if needed - but in that case - I need symptom of illness. Even in this case - If it is not broken - do not fix it!

Sincerely Lasse
 
Chewy.com
Lasse said:
In your opinion - How long time does it take for a fish collected in a rural area of Indonesia or Philippines before it 1) arrive to a wholesaler in Europe or US. 2) Leave the wholesaler and end up in a LFS 3) leave the LFS and up in an aquarium. Also in your opinion - when start the degration of the liver after exposure of cyanid?
Click to expand...

I do not know how long a collector typically holds onto a fish before shipping them, but some wholesalers I have used have shipped me fish they received the very same day. :eek: I was kinda shocked that my sales rep actually admitted that to me.

Based on my necropsies, liver damage/degradation has occurred between 3-10 days after I received the fish from the wholesaler. I haven't seen any liver damage on a deceased fish I have had for more than 10 days. And for the record, it's not just fish from the Philippines & Indonesia with damaged livers. I recently lost two Flame Angels from the Marshall Islands who both had liver damage when I performed the necropsy. I'm not saying for certain that the liver damage was caused by cyanide poisoning, but I'm trying to wrap my mind around what else it could be when other Flame Angels go through my QT protocol (medications) just fine.
 
Humblefish said:
I do not know how long a collector typically holds onto a fish before shipping them, but some wholesalers I have used have shipped me fish they received the very same day. :eek: I was kinda shocked that my sales rep actually admitted that to me.

Based on my necropsies, liver damage/degradation has occurred between 3-10 days after I received the fish from the wholesaler. I haven't seen any liver damage on a deceased fish I have had for more than 10 days. And for the record, it's not just fish from the Philippines & Indonesia with damaged livers. I recently lost two Flame Angels from the Marshall Islands who both had liver damage when I performed the necropsy. I'm not saying for certain that the liver damage was caused by cyanide poisoning, but I'm trying to wrap my mind around what else it could be when other Flame Angels go through my QT protocol (medications) just fine.
Click to expand...
Hum how long did they live. I also had a flame angel recently that at but died about 12 days after i got him. Years ago I remember getting fish that were cyanide caught some would make it some would not. I remember the fish actually looking ok but they seemed worn out, very tired. I suppose ot depends on how much they are dosed with
 
Top Shelf Aquatics
Mark Gray said:
Hum how long did they live. I also had a flame angel recently that at but died about 12 days after i got him. Years ago I remember getting fish that were cyanide caught some would make it some would not. I remember the fish actually looking ok but they seemed worn out, very tired. I suppose ot depends on how much they are dosed with
Click to expand...

One Flame lasted 8 days, the other 10 days. Same M.O.: Acting/eating fine one day, and then just staying in a corner the very next day. I saw one of the Flames having convulsions/seizures just before death. Postmortem turned up no evidence of parasites, worms, bacteria on both fish; insides looked perfectly fine except for the liver. I'll dig up the pics I took of the livers that I stored on a thumb drive.
 
BRS

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%

  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%

  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%

  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
See comments…

New Posts

Tidal Gardens
TCK Corals
Dinkins Aquatic Gardens
World Wide Corals
Chewy.com
Nutramar Foods
Top Shelf Aquatics
Deltec
New Posts
Back
Top