Warning: Use Vibrant at your own risk

[DannoOMG]

I used it in our 90 gallon tank at work. Had a huge bubble algae outbreak. Knocked it in down 8 weeks to manageable. We don't have a lot of sensitive corals in the tank though. Softies and some LPS. I also added another powerhead and I haven't dosed again for a while. Sounds like I won't be ever again.

Sounds like this is a real pickle for people.

 

[Sean Clark]

LOL. I have written my opinion multiple times. It contains an ingredient similar to algaefix according to the tests reported. What more do you want - should I tattoo it on my forehead? As to other ingredients - waiting for the rest of the independent testing just like everyone else. I should have posted this in the other thread discussing the chemistry. The question I asked was simple - Do NMR tests show 'concentration' as compared to content? Thats it.

Yes, I read your opinion and have been following along. I am not attacking your opinion or your position. Please do not get any tattoos for my benefit.
My question to you was not about its concentration relationship or even comparing it to any other product.
My question to you was if we could agree on what it is not.
Sorry for asking, I'll take that as a no.

 

[jda]

The titration, BTB and other tests that you disagreed with in the original post showed the concentration. It is within a margin of error at 4.5% just like Algaefix. These tests were also confirmed to be an accurate way to test by Bingman, Dr. RFH and I think even Christoph... expert chemists. It was accurate the first time and the expanded panel of test that came later on still show the same thing and backs up what taircha did before.

The two original NMRs also show the same spikes and sizes. The ones that I did will never line up since the machines are not likely calibrated the EXACT same (and the graphs are not on the same scale), which is why you need to use the same machine and software if you are looking for quantity of a compound. NMR is not really supposed to be used for this, per se... you can, but it is not the best.

The reef Vibrant and AlgaeFix are the same compound and the same concentration according to EVERY expert that we have available who has weighed in. I saw some stuff on the FW Vibrant version being likely the same as the reef version, but I did not commit these to memory since I don't really care - sorry.

 

[LRT]

LOL. I have written my opinion multiple times. It contains an ingredient similar to algaefix according to the tests reported. What more do you want - should I tattoo it on my forehead? As to other ingredients - waiting for the rest of the independent testing just like everyone else. I should have posted this in the other thread discussing the chemistry. The question I asked was simple - Do NMR tests show 'concentration' as compared to content? Thats it.

I can for sure think of something else that would look much better here

So is it now your angle that regardless if its an algecide and not labeled with correct warnings as such.
Its ok if its present in lower concentrations as long as we follow dosing instructions?

 

[DE FISH]

I stick with Randy and the other experts use at your own risk

 

[MnFish1]

Yes, I read your opinion and have been following along. I am not attacking your opinion or your position. Please do not get any tattoos for my benefit.
My question to you was not about its concentration relationship or even comparing it to any other product.
My question to you was if we could agree on what it is not.
Sorry for asking, I'll take that as a no.

I've said this already too. Just like everyone else - I'm waiting for the tests to see what 'else' is in Vibrant. According to the data presented - it seems fairly unlikely to be 'bacteria' - though - Taricha's experiments (the initial ones) suggested bacteria were present - in an unknown concentration. Was that what you were suggesting?

 

[DE FISH]

Why can’t the company chime in and debunk this seems they are running scared ?

 

[a.t.t.r]

I've said this already too. Just like everyone else - I'm waiting for the tests to see what 'else' is in Vibrant. According to the data presented - it seems fairly unlikely to be 'bacteria' - though - Taricha's experiments (the initial ones) suggested bacteria were present - in an unknown concentration. Was that what you were suggesting?

The results are in. There is nothing else in it. It is algaefix. Idk how you folks are missing this ? You all must be skipping pages or something.

 

[MnFish1]

I can for sure think of something else that would look much better here

So is it now your angle that regardless if its an algecide and not labeled with correct warnings as such.
Its ok if its present in lower concentrations as long as we follow dosing instructions?

I don't have an 'angle'. I asked a question. Its a discussion board.

I've also responded to your question multiple times - but thanks for giving me the opportunity to answer again: EVERY product - Chemiclean, Prime, Multiple supplements that people use every day - should be REQUIRED to label CORRECTLY and COMPLETELY their ingredients - in case of accidental ingestion, etc. This includes Vibrant and everything else we use every day. Hope that was clear.

 

[LRT]

Why can’t the company chime in and debunk this seems they are running scared ?

It appears they may have tried to but our superman level status peers very decisive and quickly squashed that quest. It seems we are down to trying to figure out different angles to make all the wrong doing ok perhaps some of us are trying to rationalize and make it feel better they got duped idk lol

 

[Sean Clark]

I've said this already too. Just like everyone else - I'm waiting for the tests to see what 'else' is in Vibrant. According to the data presented - it seems fairly unlikely to be 'bacteria' - though - Taricha's experiments (the initial ones) suggested bacteria were present - in an unknown concentration. Was that what you were suggesting?

I am also eagerly awaiting those test from UWC.
My position, based on what I have seen here, is that it seems fairly unlikely to be "bacteria". Yes, that is the common ground I was suggesting that we could agree upon.

The experiment showing bacteria present only implied that the sample was not sterile. That is clear in the post.
The centrifuge test were enough to show the lack of bacteria.

At least we have some common ground here.

 

[MnFish1]

It appears they may have tried to but our superman level status peers very decisive and quickly squashed that quest. It seems we are down to trying to figure out different angles to make all the wrong doing ok perhaps some of us are trying to rationalize and make it feel better they got duped idk lol

What on earth are you taking about? Why are you talking in the third person?

 

[LRT]

I don't have an 'angle'. I asked a question. Its a discussion board.

I've also responded to your question multiple times - but thanks for giving me the opportunity to answer again: EVERY product - Chemiclean, Prime, Multiple supplements that people use every day - should be REQUIRED to label CORRECTLY and COMPLETELY their ingredients - in case of accidental ingestion, etc. This includes Vibrant and everything else we use every day. Hope that was clear.

BTW I only took your last few posts like you may now be feeling like its ok theres a pesticide in the bottle and thats ok as long as we don't overdose our system like you did. Thanks for clarification its exactly why I asked.

 

[MnFish1]

I am also eagerly awaiting those test from UWC.
My position, based on what I have seen here, is that it seems fairly unlikely to be "bacteria". Yes, that is the common ground I was suggesting that we could agree upon.

The experiment showing bacteria present only implied that the sample was not sterile. That is clear in the post.
The centrifuge test were enough to show the lack of bacteria.

At least we have some common ground here.

If you're trying to imply that this is some new idea - its not. When the NMR results were posted (I've already stated clearly - I'm not an NMR expert) - and haven't even done anything with it since organic chemistry years ago - And Randy stated he believed them - I said basically - if its good enough for Randy - its good enough for me. While waiting for independent results. Why they are not here, or where they are - I have no clue. I'm not sure there is anything else to agree upon - or disagree about - Right?

 

[a.t.t.r]

I am also eagerly awaiting those test from UWC.
My position, based on what I have seen here, is that it seems fairly unlikely to be "bacteria". Yes, that is the common ground I was suggesting that we could agree upon.

The experiment showing bacteria present only implied that the sample was not sterile. That is clear in the post.
The centrifuge test were enough to show the lack of bacteria.

At least we have some common ground here.

And the other test show it is algaefix. Uwc test are meaningless at this point first they could not be trusted and second we now have multiple independent results showing the same conclusions from multiple people and multiple labs.

 

[DE FISH]

I love the drama!!! congrats on approaching 1000 replies on this thread Randy in Randy we trust!

 

[MnFish1]

BTW I only took your last few posts like you may now be feeling like its ok theres a pesticide in the bottle and thats ok as long as we don't overdose our system like you did. Thanks for clarification its exactly why I asked.

OK - while you keep repeating the word 'pesticide' as if its some kind of poison, toxic horrible chemical. You can also realize that if you have a swimming pool, you're swimming in it on a daily basis in all likelihood. Pesticide is used by the EPA in a very simple way - the word itself does not imply that its dangerous for anything except the 'pest' its designed to eradicate. For example - antibiotics that are prescribed throughout the world are also 'pesticides' in some situations/concentrations.

I'm not defending false labeling. I do not promote or condone companies (any company) not fully labeling/answering whats in their products if its required by law.

 

[shwareefer]

 

[Sean Clark]

If you're trying to imply that this is some new idea - its not. When the NMR results were posted (I've already stated clearly - I'm not an NMR expert) - and haven't even done anything with it since organic chemistry years ago - And Randy stated he believed them - I said basically - if its good enough for Randy - its good enough for me. While waiting for independent results. Why they are not here, or where they are - I have no clue. I'm not sure there is anything else to agree upon - or disagree about - Right?

Honestly, I am not trying to imply or suggest anything new here. I just think we as a group of everyone posting here, should be working together to find the truth. What happens in the end shouldn't be about who is "right" or who is "wrong". This should be about coming together to find what is true. I have no axe to grind here, and I certainly wouldn't suggest that I am a scientist. I just want to know the truth.

 

[jda]

I don't think that anybody should be expecting a response or anything from UWC. In each instance, they come back with something else and just kick the can of mislabeled algaecide down the road. First, just complete denial and ridicule of anybody who said otherwise, then when pressure got put on them by Dr. RHF, BRS, etc. then they were running test and now their lawyers have to read the threads to figure out how to respond (like it was not going to be based in fact or truth?).

Next is probably going to be a state supreme court needing to rule, then maybe a congressional subcommittee, joint chiefs and maybe NATO here on Earth. Will need to go to The United Federation of Planets after that and maybe a Jedi Council meeting after that.