![]() |
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() It's one of the reasons I won't put Zoa's into my tank I love the colours of them but once bitten twice shy I never want to experience that pain ever again I read everything about the corals I have now and any future ones I plan to get especially any nasty surprises they may have but no more Zoa's for me.
__________________
![]() |
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() Quote:
why do some people find it necessary to try and identify which ones are toxic and which ones are not?.....is it not a good thing just for all reefers in general to handle ALL zoanthus species with caution, so there is no second guessing?....especially when nine times out of ten no one on the internet can even agree on what morph is what.... you know I respect your opinion Levi, but to say this one is toxic and that one isnt toxic when you yourself are just speculating is irresponsible when your opinion on zoas is respected
__________________
260g mixed reef, 105g sump, water blaster 7000 return, Bubble King SM 300 skimmer, Aqua Controller Jr, 4 radions, 3 Tunze 6055s,1 tunze 6065, 2 Vortech MP40s, Vortech MP20, Tunze ATO, GHL SA2 doser, 2 TLF reactors (1 carbon, 1 rowa). http://www.canreef.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=50034 . Tank Video here http://www.vimeo.com/2304609 and here http://www.vimeo.com/16591694 |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Hey! I never "LEFT" the hobby, just doing fresh water now. Which is still listed as part of Canreef if I'm not mistaken. ![]() Last edited by The Guy; 04-21-2013 at 05:40 AM. |
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() I'd have to agree with Levi on this. Mostly because I would never try to get in to a debate about whether you should or shouldn't take general precautions against unknown health hazards in your tank. It's usually where threads on 'I was Paly-Poisoned' end up going. I think it's an obvious common sense thing to say and do, but more importantly taking the conversation there is a red herring logical fallacy in the context of specific cases of suspected paly-poisoning.
The OP of this thread wasn't talking about a mysterious ill brought about by some unknown in a tank that may or may not have possibly been allergies. No, there was a very specific claim made about a very specific poison, with photographs of the 'accused' species provided for scrutiny, therefore I think it's completely fair and valid to address that claim specifically. Contesting that there was in fact any poisoning at all does not mean that someone is suggesting care need not be taken with their livestock and personal health, nor is it a personal attack on the person making the claim, which is how I see a lot of people interpreting such criticism, it's simply contesting that there was any poisoning in the first place based on the specifics of the claim. While an expert does have some responsibility to not offer advice that could lead to harm, I think they also have a responsibility to challenge what are in fact very serious claims about something they care about when the evidence supporting that claim is weak or contradictory. In the absence of formal, peer reviewed hobby 'journals', forums have become the number 1 source of disseminated information on this trade. You do a search for just about anything aquarium related and the first page of google results will be links to RC, Canreef, and all the other major forum boards, so I think the 'experts' have a responsibility to make sure the best information is out there to be found. Paly-toxin has become something of a hobby boogeyman, and leaving the myriad claims of poisoning unchallenged when in fact there very likely has only been a few 'true' cases presents the impression to a newbie/lay-person that this hobby is much more dangerous than it is, gives a bad name to a whole family of animals that are for the most part model tank denizens, and, as Levi mentioned, waters down the real risks. Stating in bold letters that something in your tank nearly killed you is an extraordinary claim, and should be backed up with extraordinary evidence. Paly-poisoning is an incredibly severe, acute, and specific condition caused by a specific agent, and it doesn't appear that any of those agents were present here. It is also toxic in such vanishingly small quanitites that it's hard to believe that there is a such thing as being just a 'little poisoned' when it comes to paly-toxin. That's like saying there's such a thing as being a 'little poisoned' by ricin, or cobra venom. It is not a bee sting. The OP also made several comments that I think suggested an alternative and far more likely cause of the reaction. I am in no way suggesting that experience wasn't 'real' or valid, just that palytoxin probably wasn't the cause. Should everyone take general precautions when handling livestock in their tank - yes. Does that fact elevate all claims of play-toxin above the point of scrutiny and (constructive) criticism - no. |
#5
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() NO they don't, most small zoanthids don't contain palytoxin. It's only some type of palythoas that contain it and I very much doubt those contain any palytoxin. I have tons of these in my tanks for years and I have been handling them very often without any gloves. I had spray in my face, eyes and can't remember where else and never felt a thing.
I never used gloves an handle any of the zoanthids and palythoas in my tank and I am pretty sure none of them contain palytoxin. Those that were ever found to contain palytoxin are the ugly brown paly that most of us want to get rid of and come as hitchicker.
__________________
_________________________ More fish die from human stupidity than any other disease... |