[Blue Ridge Reef]

I had this bookmarked years ago and had forgotten all about it. There are about 300 articles on this site now, and I like the author's approach. He remains anonymous but is a degreed chemist and works in research science. He tests products against each other and uses a control tank with nothing added in most his tests. Some of the articles I've run across confirmed my prior hunches such as bacteria in a bottle being snake oil. When I set my fish store up, I had 50 systems or individual tanks to cycle where that proved out to me. Similarly with Prime not detoxifying ammonia. But some surprised me with the results, particularly most "chemical filtration" products such as Purigen: 7.4.6. Purigen There's a ton of misleading marketing in this hobby and lots of claims that are downright fraudulent are made by manufacturers so I'm happy that some are at least being tested. His site isn't the best laid out for navigation, but there are related links at the bottom of each page.

 

[carlsj2012]

I just read the Purigen post you linked. Wow!!! I like his work, and will be diving deeper into this site. Thanks for this!

 

[Blue Ridge Reef]

I'd switched all 11 of my current aquariums from carbon to Purigen over the last decade or so. I'm going to start only using mechanical filtration as the media gets spent and see if they don't chug along like they have been. I had an aquarium mentor in the late 80's and early 90's tell me that chemical filtration wasn't important and that a 10% water change beat a gallon of any of it in your filter. I chalked it up to him being old school at the time and have always used some form of it. The longer I do this aquarium thing, the more his advice holds up.

 

[Deanna]

So, he doesn’t like Seachem. I like what you usually post but, to me, this “aquariumscience.org” person is no different from the huckster at anoxicfiltrationsystem.

Like his anecdotal studies, I’ve also studied Purigen and Prime. There is no doubt, from my anecdotal testing, but that Purigen clarified my water overnight, when AC could not. Additionally, I’ve reduced nitrate significantly when using Purigen, as a result of ammonia being removed. I’ve added Purigen and removed it, repeatedly, to verify this. This was in my pre-high tech days. Regarding Prime, I’ve measured TAN levels at 2ppm+ and pH >7 (two separate accidents) and added Prime. No fish problems which, rightly or wrongly, I assign to Prime. Normally, I would have expected multiple deaths. Further, since I began using a drop of Prime in my LFS bags of fish, where two-hour drives home are involved, I’ve had dramatically fewer short-term deaths.

I doubt that the aquariumscience.org author is what is claimed, otherwise proof of the claim would be provided. For example, I can claim that I know what I’m talking about because I hold several doctorates, from Ivy League schools, in nuclear physics, biology, chemistry and …what did I miss? We don’t even know if his testing methods were actually followed according to his statements or verified. How can we tell if he just made everything up out of thin air? How do we know that I don’t do the same?

Credulity is rampant everywhere on the Internet.

 

[Blue Ridge Reef]

Your and my own experiences are necessarily anecdotal. "Fewer fish die after adding a drop of Prime to the shipping water," isn't data without numbers of fish that died with and without it, using fishes of what species, at what temperatures, in what volume of water and so on (as you clearly know). His methodology is explained and straightforward; he tests the products against a control and reports his findings. I don't see a bias against SeaChem in particular, seeing as Boyd, Poly Filter and others got the same results. The author's anonymity doesn't bother me, and I have no reason to suspect he's lying about his credentials. He doesn't profit or use ads on the website, nor have affiliate links so wouldn't appear to be doing it for the money. If you find no value in it, feel free to move on. I just thought it would be of interest to some folks here.

 

[Deanna]

That's right: our experiences are anecdotal ...just like his.

"His methodology is explained and straightforward; he tests the products against a control and reports his findings. " In fact, we don't know what he does.

You are also correct: you "have no reason to suspect he's lying about his credentials" BUT .. you also have no reason to suspect he's NOT lying about his credentials. That is what credulity is all about.

I won't respond further about this, as I have much respect for your input over the years and don't want to detract from this, but please be free to add a response to my comments, knowing that I'm ok with it, since it's your thread.

 

[Blue Ridge Reef]

We've had many amicable discussions over the years and I hope that doesn't stop now. I am rather surprised at your quickness to call him out as a "huckster" akin to the anoxic filter guy.

In fact, we don't know what he does.

I don't understand this objection? He explains each step of the testing methods. For Purigen, he set up 8 identical tanks, 2 with P, 2 with AC, 2 with Chemi Pure, 2 as a control and tested nitrate levels at 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks; adding 4 PPM NH4 daily. Unless you doubt that he tests anything at all and is just putting this website up to stir the puddin'. Which I admit is possible; but I'm not sure to what end. He's not selling anything. Not even ads. By all means continue posting if you have thoughts on the matter. I could critique his writing style (in particular his use of the word "proof" rather than "evidence") but assuming in good faith that he's actually carrying out the tests he's reporting on, I find it potentially very valuable. It's exactly the kind of thing I wish I had the time to do with my own empty tanks. Being in this industry I've lost a lot of faith in aquatic products living up the manufacturer claims, and am eager to learn what works as advertised and what doesn't.

 

[Deanna]

Let me get back to you later.

 

[billb]

We've had many amicable discussions over the years and I hope that doesn't stop now. I am rather surprised at your quickness to call him out as a "huckster" akin to the anoxic filter guy.

I don't understand this objection? He explains each step of the testing methods. For Purigen, he set up 8 identical tanks, 2 with P, 2 with AC, 2 with Chemi Pure, 2 as a control and tested nitrate levels at 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks; adding 4 PPM NH4 daily. Unless you doubt that he tests anything at all and is just putting this website up to stir the puddin'. Which I admit is possible; but I'm not sure to what end. He's not selling anything. Not even ads. By all means continue posting if you have thoughts on the matter. I could critique his writing style (in particular his use of the word "proof" rather than "evidence") but assuming in good faith that he's actually carrying out the tests he's reporting on, I find it potentially very valuable. It's exactly the kind of thing I wish I had the time to do with my own empty tanks. Being in this industry I've lost a lot of faith in aquatic products living up the manufacturer claims, and am eager to learn what works as advertised and what doesn't.

Hello Blue Ridge Reef, I haven't looked at the site but would suggest that the example you gave regarding Purigen was poorly designed. If you look right on Seachems information page regarding Purigen, It explains ammonia control this way:
"Purigen® controls ammonia, nitrites and nitrates by removing nitrogenous organic waste that would otherwise release these harmful compounds. "

It removes larger, nitrogen containing molecules like amino acids or proteins that would otherwise get broken down into ammonia and nitrite. It doesn't remove ammonia directly. So testing it by adding ammonia to tanks is a flawed experimental setup and will not demonstrate Purigen's effectiveness The person behind this may have good intentions but he needs to show more rigor in these evaluations

 

[somewhatshocked]

Meh, that guy. In some cases, he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about and it's very apparent after spending a few minutes on the site. In many instances, he's just making it up as he goes along.

Red flag number one should be that they're "anonymous". Though, if anyone is so inclined, you can check old domain registry data to find information that leads to their identity. Which I'd encourage folks to do so they can discover why he is hyper-critical of brands made by companies that he doesn't financially benefit from. (This is where I'd raise an eyebrow and purse my lips in-person - like a meemaw with some sass.)

Example: his rants on commercial substrates for planted tanks. Saying Eco-Complete (crushed lava rock) is the same or similar to ADA Aqua Soil Amazonia is absurd to the point of laughable. That's just one example. On the same page, he claims Eco-Complete is also "simply ground up calcined iron rich clay soil" - equally absurd. CaribSea confirms it's just lava rock... in case anyone who has ever seen it wasn't already aware. I published emails from them about it more than a decade ago that also confirms that it's inert. It's not calcined clay like Safe-T-Sorb or cat litter. I mean... what?

His claims about Purigen are not based in reality. I don't buy his claims at all. I don't use it to clear ammonia or nitrate (but it does work for that - see other posts about aminos/proteins - that's why it's popular with shrimpers) but for polishing purposes and it absolutely works where he claims it doesn't. A Purigen reactor (even if using knock-off resign, which I prefer because of price) can clear a 20gal tank of blackwater absurdly fast. Regular filtration media and carbon absolutely cannot. I used a large pillow of it in an AC70 earlier today to clear up my 40B after spilling nearly a quart(! don't ask - wasn't fully awake) of what I make and refer to as leaf litter concentrate. Don't know how fast it was but it was fast enough that it impressed me - even after years and years of use.

Also have to nitpick the bacteria in a bottle bit. Not all of it is necessarily garbage. SafeStart Plus, Bio-Spira (marine. never tried the fresh.) and Dr. Tim's are all reliable if they're properly refrigerated or kept from temperature extremes from start to finish. Brightwell has some good stuff, as well. His experiments don't mention temperature at all. Have used the ones I mention here in tanks and have been able to process 3-4 PPM of ammonia in just a day or two. Fluval/Nutrafin(?) used to have a good product but it's hit-or-miss lately due to shipping from the manufacturer. It was better when it was produced in Canada. I still strongly dislike the products that work for their intended purpose. I think most tanks should be run for a month or two with daily doses of ammonia. Even if they can process it all from day one. Note: Stability is garbage. He's right about that.

I wouldn't say he's Novak-level huckster. Because many of his experiments are, by all appearances, sound or sound-ish.

P.S. His claim about water hardness not mattering is flipping psycho.

 

[Deanna]

Well, I’m back and, since you asked me to continue, ...

I see that other posts have appeared challenging the details of his work. My technical challenges were merely based upon my own contradictory experiences. However, I’ll offer a challenge to his MO.

I make a lot of claims, and am also very careful to hide my identity. Therefore, I have no expectation that anyone should necessarily believe me, and I make no effort to try to convince those that reject my suggestions that I am a god that should not be challenged. His MO is to state that he is a god and that those that think not, are worthy of denigration. Fundamentally, I become very suspicious when ‘methinks that he doth protest too much’ (please overlook my likely mangling of the quote) …particularly in advance of any direct challenge.

Per your question as to why he would create such a website: ego satisfaction is a powerful motivator for some. Look to FB for proof of this. If he needs stroking, he should provide verifiable identification and seek independent, and verifiable, corroboration. Would he pass fact checking with his current approach?

I feel as though I am now ‘piling on,’ but I truly believe that, in it’s current form, his is one website that should be discounted.

 

[FischAutoTechGarten]

I remember the Novak vs APD and individuals lawsuits from like 20 years ago. Wanted $15 million for emotional damages because he was called out on internet forums...

 

[Blue Ridge Reef]

Having spent a little time on the substrate and food sections, I'm more dubious than I was yesterday; though not ready to call the guy out as a fraud. I think his intentions are good, and there doesn't seem to be branding bias which I know I'm not above. I think we are all guilty of believing the ways we do things are right, and this fellow is no different. And testing to reach a foregone conclusion is rarely viable, if in fact that's how he is approaching it.

Per your question as to why he would create such a website: ego satisfaction is a powerful motivator for some. Look to FB for proof of this. If he needs stroking, he should provide verifiable identification and seek independent, and verifiable, corroboration. Would he pass fact checking with his current approach?

Fair enough. I'm just not seeing an ego boost when paired with anonymity -but people are strange creatures.

Hello Blue Ridge Reef, I haven't looked at the site but would suggest that the example you gave regarding Purigen was poorly designed. If you look right on Seachems information page regarding Purigen, It explains ammonia control this way:
"Purigen® controls ammonia, nitrites and nitrates by removing nitrogenous organic waste that would otherwise release these harmful compounds. "

It removes larger, nitrogen containing molecules like amino acids or proteins that would otherwise get broken down into ammonia and nitrite. It doesn't remove ammonia directly. So testing it by adding ammonia to tanks is a flawed experimental setup and will not demonstrate Purigen's effectiveness The person behind this may have good intentions but he needs to show more rigor in these evaluations

I wasn't expecting a critique from someone who didn't bother to read the article and for the sake of brevity, I summarized this test. He did in fact test it using larger molecular compounds in the form of powdered fish food:

Sufficient protein powder was added to the tank to produce a nitrogen level of 4 ppm in the form of ammonia from decomposing food (13% of the protein in food is nitrogen). 4 ppm of nitrogen was added in the form of food every day.

I am unlucky enough to have 24 empty 20 gallon aquariums and the temptation to replicate his chemical filtration experiment is strong. But the amount of cleaning, getting filters running, and coming to the store even on my days off to add NH4 knocks me back to reality. There is no way for 16 straight weeks I would be able to do this daily.

Also have to nitpick the bacteria in a bottle bit. Not all of it is necessarily garbage.

When I set my store tanks up (identically on fishless cycles as well as a couple of racks using zebra danios), I did tests of several brands of bottled bacteria vs nothing added and there was no rhyme or reason as to which tanks cycled fastest; though the fish-in tanks beat the NH4 tanks generally. Lots of products have come out since I did that, and I obviously didn't test them all but the results were pretty telling and I never felt ethical selling products I didn't believe in and thus have never had a bottled bacteria product on my shelves.

My own belief (arguably bias) that a minimum of products are needed to keep healthy tanks has been reinforced more times than I can count. I was breeding shrimp for probably close to 10 years before I saw people telling me online that Bacter AE was necessary for good survival of babies. People can have a strong belief in the products they buy being responsible for success.

And there is a lot of dishonest marketing out there. To the best of my knowledge aloe vera has never been shown to promote slime coats on fish and yet I get people walking into my shop pretty frequently who think Stress Coat is superior to Prime or other dechlorinators because they saw an ad. I could go on and on. The average planted aquarium hobbyist's misconception about "liquid CO2" doing remotely the same thing as a pressurized gas is a prime example. If this guy is actually performing the test he claims to be, he's doing to lord's work for all of us in the hobby. If he's just making stuff up and posting it online; that's an equally huge disservice.

 

[somewhatshocked]

I remember the Novak vs APD and individuals lawsuits from like 20 years ago. Wanted $15 million for emotional damages because he was called out on internet forums...

You're thinking of Robert Novak.

 

[somewhatshocked]

My own belief (arguably bias) that a minimum of products are needed to keep healthy tanks

Not sure that's belief and don't believe it's you being biased. I think it's a fact that minimal products are necessary to keep healthy tanks. Heck, it's even ideal.

Bacter AE

Ugh. What a terrible product that causes way more harm than good with newcomers. Makes my head spin.

It's not even what the manufacturer claims most of the time. Honestly can't believe it's legal to sell for its claimed purpose. Bet it wouldn't be if there were a regulator agency to take a look at it. My belief (based on testing done by others) is that it's primarily bulk probiotic powder sold for livestock with some added sugars.

And there is a lot of dishonest marketing out there.

That's an understatement! Especially in this hobby. Probably why a website like that is so initially appealing. The marketing surrounding Eco-Complete alone is enough to infuriate half this forum. Never mind all the social media and YouTube hype of unnecessary products that don't live up to any of the hype.

100% agree with you about the ethics of bacteria in a bottle, how it's marketed, how it's sold to be used. It's really almost cruel. Some of the products, when kept in ideal conditions, can be useful in some regard for sure. But for a newcomer starting up their first tank? No way. To dump in a tank you started with fish on day one? Also no way. Maybe for nerds like me to use on occasion for the purpose of cycling a super-acidic shrimp tank in 60-70 days instead of 4-5 months? It can sometimes be helpful. Though, not as helpful as live filter media from another tank that's already adapted to similar conditions. I doubt I would sell it if I had a shop because I already won't recommend it to most people.

.....

About branding bias... we all get into those slumps. I prefer AquaClear and Eheim equipment when I can use them because of decades of past experience. Definitely biased. But this guy's issue is more than bias - it's about financial ties - and I find it personally disappointing that conflicts of interest aren't disclosed. Like @Deanna says, anyone who can't or won't stand by what they claim generally isn't someone to be fully trusted. If you or me say something is garbage, we're attaching our name to it and we're saying it because we really mean it. Because we're probably speaking from direct personal experiences.

When it comes to experiments from some unidentified individual? I want to see some evidence of what is being claimed. Because there needs to be something of substance to back up those claims. Especially when it comes to combating what is effectively snake oil in a hobby filled with susceptible, young newcomers.

 

[Blue Ridge Reef]

About branding bias... we all get into those slumps. I prefer AquaClear and Eheim equipment when I can use them because of decades of past experience. Definitely biased. But this guy's issue is more than bias - it's about financial ties - and I find it personally disappointing that conflicts of interest aren't disclosed.

I don't see the financial ties. Heck, he recommends pot scrubbers for mechanical filtration. If I saw any hint of it anywhere I'd have viewed this whole site differently from the start. Am I missing something?

As you know, I too am a AC & Eheim disciple. I don't even want to think of all the filters I've thrown out during the time those have run continuously. Not to mention no cartridges. I'm just second guessing some of the products I've been buying in lieu of those cartridges being no better than if I'd just used sponges.

 

[FischAutoTechGarten]

You're thinking of Robert Novak.

Yeah I am... he gave many fellow plant enthusiasts allot of grief (I think he even went after Tom Barr) just for speaking out about the poor quality of his merchandise and poor customer service. He had a bruised ego... I thought that's what you were referring to....

I guess I'm not familiar with this other Novak of whom you speak that promoted questionable aquatic husbandry practices....

Anecdotal, but my limited experience is such that allot of poret foam in a generous sump resevoir, CO2 injection, UV filtration, good fertiliser regimen,limited light schedules, water changes, water changes, and water changes have brought a measure of success to my aquariums. In person, the clarity of my water columns really gives the impression that fish are floating on air... I haven't needed to latch onto any extremet (extreme) practices.... Now sometimes my stemps (stems) get scrawny... and my deep red plants fade to pinkish red... and my crypts get some holes in their leaves.... so obviously I still have a long way to go... But I'm caustion (cautious) about adopting far out practices to get there....


Holy typos... sorry folks...

 

[somewhatshocked]

I don't see the financial ties. Heck, he recommends pot scrubbers for mechanical filtration. If I saw any hint of it anywhere I'd have viewed this whole site differently from the start. Am I missing something?

Mentioned this last night:

Red flag number one should be that they're "anonymous". Though, if anyone is so inclined, you can check old domain registry data to find information that leads to their identity. Which I'd encourage folks to do so they can discover why he is hyper-critical of brands made by companies that he doesn't financially benefit from. (This is where I'd raise an eyebrow and purse my lips in-person - like a meemaw with some sass.)

Don't want to dox or identify him but it's out there and generally public information. It's just not immediately apparent. Then again, I find people who don't want to be found for a living. So 🤷‍♂️.

Became suspicious initially in looking at the products he rails against and/or is dishonest about - like stuff from Seachem and CaribSea - and there's little to back up his claims.

I'd be more inclined to support someone if they were transparent about their likes and dislikes. Like @Deanna. They don't necessarily identify themselves but make it clear when they like or don't like something and explain why. So I, personally, don't need to know more about their identity.

Sites like that make me really appreciate people who make their biases clear. Specifically when it comes to product reviews.

And to @FischAutoTechGarten: You aren't internetting if you aren't typoing. That's what I tell myself, anyway.

 

[Leeatl]

I don't put much stock in this site and am glad to see some of the members here with similar views. There is a guy on one of my FB groups that references this site all the time. May be the author, I don't know, but he does it to newbies and it makes me so mad. That is the real danger. For beginners to not know if the site is founded in fact or not and take the advice as gospel. There are some remarks about this site on the net. I looked and found them. We all should do the same.

 

[Blue Ridge Reef]

Mentioned this last night:

This link brings me back to your previous post. Was there financial incentive I've missed (3 times now, I wouldn't put it past me this week)? Or have you figured out this guy's identity and he's in the industry? If that's the case, I see no qualms about outing him; though that's obviously your call. If he's in the aquatics industry, it would be interesting to learn what company he's with and whether he's ever done a review on their products. I didn't see a whole lot of praise outside of Fluval Bug Bites being rated pretty highly, but I haven't looked into the site much since yesterday. If this guy isn't legit, that's a real downer, because someone should be doing exactly what he claims to be.