Vibrant misshap.

Mui_Gogeta · Sep 26, 2022

Garf said:
Every cloud, and all that.

What else have you got in there?

I got 25 hermits 2 cerith 2 clownfish 1 blue damsel.

Everything was good this morning when I left for work I'll find out more when I get home I suppose.

Mui_Gogeta · Sep 26, 2022

Tuan’s Reef said:
Can you post pics? This could an example tank to what happens when a whole bottle of vibrant is dosed.

I'd go to the LFS and get enough water for at least 50% or more water change.

Well it's hard to tell which one got the most vibrant since I was dosing both tanks thinking it was bacteria but ya.

First pic is the old tank nitrates were at 100 and phosphate was at .46

Second is the tank after transferring (to the waterbox 60.2) this one has the most as I took the time to pour it on each bioball before putting them in. (**** me I really should have noticed then) I haven't done any tests yet.

a.t.t.r · Sep 26, 2022

You may end up with Dino’s now but hopfully not. Vibrant is terrible for your tank unless you use it continuously it is an algicide and leaves a nice niche in the food chain that bad things take over as soon as the poison is gone. Thankfully you don’t have any coral so I think you’ll be fine as far as additional death go excluding the snails.

nereefpat · Sep 26, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
According to a bunch of hobbyists? No thanks, I’d stick with the actual makers and real scientists to determine what vibrant is.

The actual makers are people pouring API's Algaefix into Vibrant bottles to resell. NMR shows the contents in Vibrant and Algaefix to be identical. Thread showing the NMR is here: https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/u...gaefix-polixetonium-chloride-busan-77.893292/

tehmadreefer said:
Additionally, please provide proof they were kicked off of r2r for their vibrant product.

From this thread: https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/vibrant-update-from-uwc.904423/page-2
"Last update from UWC said they intended to respond once the audit (presumably meaning the EPA site inspection) is completed. In the meanwhile, Reef2Reef has suspended their sponsorship pending further clarification of the situation from UWC."

Randy Holmes-Farley · Sep 26, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
This is categorically false.

lol

Very strong words.

It all seems categorically correct to me, without a single word being false.

IslandLifeReef · Sep 26, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
According to a bunch of hobbyists? No thanks, I’d stick with the actual makers and real scientists to determine what vibrant is. Additionally, please provide proof they were kicked off of r2r for their vibrant product.

Go to the last few posts in the link I posted and you will see that UWC, the makers of Vibrant, were removed from R2R and the reason.

These weren't just hobbyists verifying what was in Vibrant, there were professional labs involved.

Saying it isn't so and that @Randy Holmes-Farley isn't the top chemist in the world doesn't prove your point, it only makes you look like you are resistant to facts.

Randy Holmes-Farley · Sep 26, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
According to a bunch of hobbyists? No thanks, I’d stick with the actual makers and real scientists to determine what vibrant is. Additionally, please provide proof they were kicked off of r2r for their vibrant product.

UWC was suspended by Reef2Reef as a sponsor.

They have not been adjudicated for claims about Vibrant that may violate terms of service. That is pending final outcome of the current situation (EPA site inspection that started in march, UWC giving their promised side of the story, etc.), but since they have not been on their official account since March, I view it as a nonemergency.

Randy Holmes-Farley · Sep 26, 2022

IslandLifeReef said:
Saying it isn't so and that @Randy Holmes-Farley isn't the top chemist in the world doesn't prove your point, it only makes you look like you are resistant to facts.

Sadly, that's not one of my claims to fame anyway. lol

Randy Holmes-Farley · Sep 26, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
Additionally. Randy is not the top scientist on the world and just because he says it, doesn’t make anything fact. I use vibrant bi weekly along with microbacter 7

Just to be clear, no one is telling you to not use it.

Folks are just saying it is not bacteria. There's a chemically identical product, Algaefix, that folks use knowing it is an algaecide. If that's what they want to use, great.

It's the mislabeling that's the issue with Vibrant, and the risks folks may be taking without knowing it.

psiconauta · Sep 30, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
According to a bunch of hobbyists? No thanks, I’d stick with the actual makers and real scientists to determine what vibrant is. Additionally, please provide proof they were kicked off of r2r for their vibrant product.

look it up, easy. if you want to stay blindfolded its up to you.

tehmadreefer · Sep 30, 2022

psiconauta said:
look it up, easy. if you want to stay blindfolded its up to you.

Look what up? Randy’s opinion?

Randy Holmes-Farley · Oct 4, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
Look what up? Randy’s opinion?

lol

My opinion? I had nothing to do with the studies at university instrument facilities that showed what it was and that caused the EPA to begin an onsite investigation (except to weigh in after the fact along with a number of other chemistry experts who understand how to interpret data from NMR and IR).

Did you even look up what we are talking about?

Like you, I don't think the EPA is interested in my opinion. They are interested in facts. The facts were apparently concerning enough to them that they came to UWC in March, and apparently have not yet resolved this issue since as recently as August, UWC said they are not able to publicly comment, but will when they can.

Tonycass12 · Oct 4, 2022

Randy Holmes-Farley said:
lol

My opinion? I had nothing to do with the studies at university instrument facilities that showed what it was and that caused the EPA to begin an onsite investigation (except to weigh in after the fact along with a number of other chemistry experts who understand how to interpret data from NMR and IR).

Did you even look up what we are talking about?

Like you, I don't think the EPA is interested in my opinion. They are interested in facts. The facts were apparently concerning enough to them that they came to UWC in March, and apparently have not yet resolved this issue since as recently as August, UWC said they are not able to publicly comment, but will when they can.

I dont think @tehmadreefer is interested in the facts, everything they need to know is on UWC's website.

tehmadreefer · Oct 4, 2022

Randy Holmes-Farley said:
lol

My opinion? I had nothing to do with the studies at university instrument facilities that showed what it was and that caused the EPA to begin an onsite investigation (except to weigh in after the fact along with a number of other chemistry experts who understand how to interpret data from NMR and IR).

Did you even look up what we are talking about?

Like you, I don't think the EPA is interested in my opinion. They are interested in facts. The facts were apparently concerning enough to them that they came to UWC in March, and apparently have not yet resolved this issue since as recently as August, UWC said they are not able to publicly comment, but will when they can.

The EPA isn’t investigating them over Vibtant, so please stop…

Randy Holmes-Farley · Oct 5, 2022

tehmadreefer said:
The EPA isn’t investigating them over Vibtant, so please stop…

Why do you claim that? You either have additional inside information about other unregistered pesticides that UWC sells or manufactures, or literally are just making up crap. It would be nice to know which.

UWC provided me a picture of the signed EPA inspection document left with UWC when the EPA and the Mn Department of Agriculture showed up on March 23 for an inspection.

This is what that signed form indicates:

There is a check box indicting that it is a "For Cause Inspection" as opposed to a routine inspection, and it gives the following reason for the for cause inspection.

"For Cause - Violations Suspected. The distribution and/or sale of unregistered pesticides and the distribution and/or sale of pesticides or devices produced in an establishment not registered with the EPA;"

I cut off the end of that full statement because it goes on to list the names of the EPA and MN Dep of Ag officials doing the investigation, which I did not think needs to be made public. It is signed by both an EPA rep, and Jeff Jacobson, owner of UWC.

Jeff also told me the inspectors planned to come back the next day, and later told me they are "not able" to make any public posts but want to do so when they can.

So I'm curious what explanation you have for the info Jeff provided that is consistent with your claim that the EPA isn't investigating UWC about Vibrant? Are other UWC products unregistered pesticides?

bnord · Oct 5, 2022

CoralB said:
Oh No !!! Water changes , water changes .

carbon can't hurt

a.t.t.r · Oct 5, 2022

Randy Holmes-Farley said:
Why do you claim that? You either have additional inside information about other unregistered pesticides that UWC sells or manufactures, or literally are just making up crap. It would be nice to know which.

UWC provided me a picture of the signed EPA inspection document left with UWC when the EPA and the Mn Department of Agriculture showed up on March 23 for an inspection.

This is what that signed form indicates:

There is a check box indicting that it is a "For Cause Inspection" as opposed to a routine inspection, and it gives the following reason for the for cause inspection.

"For Cause - Violations Suspected. The distribution and/or sale of unregistered pesticides and the distribution and/or sale of pesticides or devices produced in an establishment not registered with the EPA;"

I cut off the end of that full statement because it goes on to list the names of the EPA and MN Dep of Ag officials doing the investigation, which I did not think needs to be made public. It is signed by both an EPA rep, and Jeff Jacobson, owner of UWC.

Jeff also told me the inspectors planned to come back the next day, and later told me they are "not able" to make any public posts but want to do so when they can.

So I'm curious what explanation you have for the info Jeff provided that is consistent with your claim that the EPA isn't investigating UWC about Vibrant? Are other UWC products unregistered pesticides?

I mean at this point let’s assume yes. All of their products are