Soaking food in garlic and vitamins...

If you can't use the obvious PROOF of so many articles, then any article or even experience on the liver thing goes down the toilet also.
 
@Justiful , your observations are supported.

"Most fish feed is lacking in amino acids that generate an aroma and palatable taste, such as histidine, leucine, aspartic acid, and valine. The fragrant ingredients of fish are generally sulfurcontaining base groups. Biochemical analysis has indicated that garlic contains various alkyl sulfide compounds and the C3H6S (0)-base group, which relates to flesh aroma. Therefore, the addition of garlic to feed could make up for the shortage and improve flesh quality."
Lee, J., & Gao, Y. (2012). Review of the Application of Garlic, Allium sativum , in Aquaculture. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society, 43(4),
 
If you can't use the obvious PROOF of so many articles, then any article or even experience on the liver thing goes down the toilet also.

I'm not sure I understand. May I respectfully request you explain a little more.
 
I didn't try to access any of those to read them, but care to share the conclusions? Just because there was a study done doesn't mean that it's beneficial or not, or that the study was well done. Sometimes the conclusions are a stretch just to make the research seem relevant and not a waste of the authors or sponsors time and money... They could even be contradicting one another for all I know.

Just look at all of the studies for vitamins and supplements for humans.

Now if every study documented a clear statistically valid benefit that would be something!

What do the people do who's business is raising and farming fish? Do they use garlic and how?
Than we have to read some of the articles...
 
I'm not sure I understand. May I respectfully request you explain a little more.
U provided articles that proven is proof that it doesn't hurt their liver. If the one guy doesn't want to accept those term anything he says that proves the liver thing wiki be unusable
 
my question still stands. why would you feed garlic to healthy fish? my fish go crazy when food hits the water. they are not going to eat better if I add garlic to their food. as I said, I understand adding garlic to entice a fish to eat, but why keep adding something that is completely foreign in nature? there is no proof that it protects a fish from anything.
 
U provided articles that proven is proof that it doesn't hurt their liver. If the one guy doesn't want to accept those term anything he says that proves the liver thing wiki be unusable

Got it. Thank you for the rewording.
 
my question still stands. why would you feed garlic to healthy fish? my fish go crazy when food hits the water. they are not going to eat better if I add garlic to their food. as I said, I understand adding garlic to entice a fish to eat, but why keep adding something that is completely foreign in nature? there is no proof that it protects a fish from anything.

That's a valid point. It's not that it's intended for only unhealthy fish, per se, but for healthy fish under stress, to try and head off disease. They have a lot of limitations on what they can use on food fish and their motivations are a lot different than ours. So, I guess the fact they are trying to prevent disease means it actually is protecting the fish, right? They are not questioning whether or not garlic has benefits. Those studies have been long done and accepted. We're still here discussing the same thing we were three years ago (I say three, because I can see I had this discussion on another forum 3 years ago). We still haven't gotten past this point.

So, the facts we have so far.....
- there are a lot of legit studies out there that support the benefits of garlic.
- it's an immunostimulant, it can help fish get through times of stress, which makes fish vulnerable to disease.
- it increases the palatability of food


What we don't have is something to support that garlic is "bad" as a supplement. If I had some journals that supported that, I would bring them forward, but nothing like that shows up when I do a search..... not an internet search, but a journal search. Someone will make my day if they could show an article that someone here had access to read.
 
Last edited:
Your right, garlic doesn't prevent or cure anything. But the immune system of the fish can and garlic helps the immune system. Hence giving it a stronger defense system against anything.
 
I would love to combat a lot of the myths, so that the next time someone sees this conversation somewhere, they can respectfully address the myth and provide "proof". The only way to remove it from the log of "forum facts", is to keep addressing it and talking about it. It can be hard to have these conversations without hurting someone's feelings or ticking someone off, but ya still gotta have the tough conversations to move forward.

I do not dose garlic, btw.
 
Last edited:
Gotcha...may have had some experience with this years ago...do they still use this method in places today?

It's not common or legal, but yes, there are places that still sneak this in. We were having trouble with brightly colored dwarf lions collected from certain areas. They would go down exactly like the cyanide fish do. I've been waiting to do a necropsy on one, but I never saw another after that. Isn't that always the way!
 
The pr0pioitor of my favorite LFS who is very good with fish – swears by fresh garlic – but not for wrasses - I've never found garlic to be a game changer one way or the other...In fairness I've not had too many occasions to use it.

I think though that there is sufficient evidence – both anecdotal and research based to elevate it above the “snake-oil” classification making it worthy of further investigation and discussion.

One caution though is that while many studies report “statistical significance” of results – that alone doesn't imply “biological significance”. Going by research studies alone is fraught with difficulties – they often can be suggestive, but it’s rare that they are directly on point. Generalizations made from such inferences are often poorly founded and can be flat out wrong.

“The conclusion that there is a statistically significant difference indicates only that the difference is unlikely to have occurred by chance. It does not mean that the difference is necessarily large, important, or significant in the common meaning of the word.”

As to the suggestion that garlic might cause liver damage in fish – you might be inclined to dismiss this possibility based on the lack of studies on this result. I don’t think this would be a necessarily valid conclusion.

Here are a couple of studies that might give you a little more food for thought…the first in rats – the second with fish.


Therefore, the present study suggests that garlic with high dose has the potential ability to induce liver damage and low doses (0.1 or 0.25 g / kg body weight/day) are safe doses of garlic.”

This study leaves the question of chronic administration and cumulative effect largely unanswered, but after reading that one here’s one that’s more specific to our question:


“the damage of garlic on both liver and kidney in this work may be attributed to the relative high dose of garlic used.”

Clear signs of damage to the liver and kidneys – but no follow through as to what dosage would preclude such findings – nor the effect of chronic administration – both questions unanswered.

So some evidence that garlic could be involved in liver damage – does it apply to how we use garlic in our tanks? Maybe. It enought to temper my enthusiasm a bit – but I think you would next have to look at the efficacy of garlic in some real-world applications.

I admit I have not read many articles – but like lionfish – I do prefer some of the aquaculture studies as they tend to more closely align with what we’re trying to do. Just bear in mind that growing fish for consumption in a few months is different than keeping them long term – and maybe breading them. Just pointing out, they may be more inclined to not examine chronic exposure.

This study looks at garlic powder as a food additive for fingerling Atlantic salmon in an aquaculture setting and contrasts results with controls and other agents when treating an amoebic gill disease:

http://www.frdc.com.au/research/Final_Reports/2004-213-DLD.PDF

salmon.png

I really did not dig in to deeply on this report, but on first pass, the results aren’t that impressive, and not even that consistent, but I do like the specificity of the report.

I have no dog in this hunt – just thought I would share where I think the “garlic caution” may have originated from and at least one study that used garlic in an actual "in vivo" application. So all I can say is garlic powder doesn't look too promising for salmon smelts with ameobic gill disease - nothing more.

In the large list of studies cited by lionfish – it would be interesting to see how many assessed liver function and histology and which, if any yeilded in vivo, biologically significant (not just statistically significant) results.
 
I do both. Garlic @2X week, Selcon every feeding to be on safe side. Fish look good from it.
 
I believe only a couple are in vitro and I think they were in the parasitic articles. I'm giving them all a read through again.

I know one source of the "liver issues" was from an article that was evaluating replacing oil in the feed. We're going to be hurting for fish oil to feed our people fish food in the future, so they're looking already to try and solve this problem. Reading the future concerns of aquaculture makes our days feel numbered. I'm going to also give yours a read and look for my nutrition books. I believe there's a chapter about it in there as well. Someone was using the results of a study about oil REPLACEMENT and tried to apply it to the topic of supplementation/enrichment. You could almost follow a trail leading back to that one item.

There are so many possible variables that you have to be careful of interpretations of the data. Like even where I said "it's an immunostimulant"..... sure it is, as it's proven, but is it really to a degree where it's measurably beneficial? That's one of the things you have to consider. As an exercise in class we were divided into groups to write a paper on a topic. We were each given opposing views to prove and both sides had to use the same papers to do it. It was to demonstrate how you can manipulate data/studies to prove different things. Not always intentional, of course. The researchers have to draw the line at evaluating variables, because you could be there a lifetime addressing them, but did the study draw the right line? We never know.

Even if we proved garlic was the miracle drug, it still wouldn't prove that it's beneficial to administer it the way we do. They don't feed their stock the way we feed our fish. We don't use the same products or forms of garlic.

Well stated, @robert
 
Last edited:

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%
Back
Top