Possible zoa poisoning

[fishytime]

Originally Posted by Zoaelite

Wrong, only certain species from the order contain the toxin.

I'm not down playing how toxic the toxin is simply my opinion that 90% of the accusations put onto the internet don't have a credible base of evidence.



Found here.

Every single one of the corals you added was a zoa, very unlikely they contain the toxin.

so he was imagining his symptoms and the doctor was wrong?


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

[The Guy]

Originally Posted by fishytime

so he was imagining his symptoms and the doctor was wrong?


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

Exactly, in my statement I said " I don't THINK it matters" so I consider that they are all capable of toxin stinging, so that's why I suggest wearing the gloves and glasses, why chance it. Also some people could be more skin sensitive than others.

[daniella3d]

They don't sting and they don't bite either. They produce mucus when upset and they can spray water quite far when taken out of the water. They don't have any eyes, but they seem to be expert at spraying that water in the eyes of the person who is handling them. I have been sprayed a few times, rinsed the eyes right away and did not have any effect.

On the other end, I am getting an allergic skin reaction when I touch certains coral like frogspawn and hammer. Looks like the same type of pimples that one gets when touching poison oak and it itch like crazy.

A lot of things can cause an allergic reaction in our aquariums.

Originally Posted by clown lover

Exactly, in my statement I said " I don't THINK it matters" so I consider that they are all capable of toxin stinging, so that's why I suggest wearing the gloves and glasses. Also some people could be more skin sensitive than others as well.

[The Guy]

Originally Posted by daniella3d

They don't sting and they don't bite either. They produce mucus when upset and they can spray water quite far when taken out of the water. They don't have any eyes, but they seem to be expert at spraying that water in the eyes of the person who is handling them. I have been sprayed a few times, rinsed the eyes right away and did not have any effect.

On the other end, I am getting an allergic skin reaction when I touch certains coral like frogspawn and hammer. Looks like the same type of pimples that one gets when touching poison oak and it itch like crazy.

A lot of things can cause an allergic reaction in our aquariums.

So I guess stinging was not the right word to use, my "point" is why not be safe and wear the gloves and or the glasses when handling corals to avoid the skin discomfort. It's your skin you decide.

[jason604]

Zoas containing palytoxin is more than real. Believe it or not but its not a certain type of zoas that contain palytoxin but it depends on each head/polyp. Most head of a colony or whatever size do not contain the toxin but it may be just 1 or 2 head within that group that may contain palytoxin. And the comment that "paly"toxin only Is in palys is totally wrong. There are a few Marine species that contain it and not only are they corals. They are also contained in some types of anemone and even a crab that's called(demania reynaudii). There's been documents of a person eating this crab and died of palytoxin poisoning. So this is type of toxin in zoas is more than just real and no chances should be made that(oooh my zoas are not poisonous and I don't need to be careful)

[toytech]

I think the real moral of the story is don't drink the water ! Corals produce all kinds of things when ticked off and the last thing you want to do is ingest them . They have other toxins that you can have a reaction too and its not just zoas and palys .

[reefwars]

something seems odd here.....



i find it odd that a doctor will agree with you with no further tests?

i also find it odd that he said you were poisoned but showed you no proof id love to see what the doctor wrote for you if he wrote or did anything at all besides:

"I went to my doctor and he said I might have gotten slightly poisoned by ingesting the poison. He then told me If I were to ingest a higher amount I would only have had 90mins to get treated at the hospital ori would have died!!! Next time I'm not taking any chances with these things and will go to the hospital ASAP! Be careful with your zoas guys!!, don't take any risk and remember the most beautiful things in life can be the most deadly!"

if someone goes to a dotor showing symptoms of poisoning more than likely unless its a basement doctor they are going to push for further tests or to go to a facility who can accomodate the tests needed to verify the poison(toxin)

how does the doctor know it isnt contagious, lethal or something that could be viral? does the doctor have any info at all on the subject any references or experience with the toxin? highly doubt it which is all the more reason to suggest seeing someone more suited to this type of work.

werent you concerned? didnt you push for solid answers, maybe go to a lab and get tested?



the toxin in doses large enough to kill or hurt us is in P. heliodiscus or P. toxica which is still in circulation but p. toxica is no longer allowed to be collected, not sure if p.heliodiscus is or not but i imagine it is.

we are still unsure if any more species have it but the family is too large to tell for sure.

yes i agree always wear gloves fact is anything marine is foreign to our bodies not just toxin but theres other risks as well since we do not know alot about some of these wide spread species.

saying that my " zoas " have palytoxin will need to do much better....

and for the comment above about what does it matter well it matters.

why?


how can we limit collections, handling and restrictions on species if we cant weed out the serious, fake or mild experiences? how can we prepare general hospitals and doctors of such toxins if they can not be narrowed down? how can we do research on the toxic species if we do not know what they are?

yes it is hard to tell a zoanthus gigantus from a zoanthus sociatus or palythoas sp. or protopaly but its not impossible and there are distinct differences in the species like any other.


over all when dealing with marine animals all precautions shjould be taken after all we know very little about much of these animals.


glad your ok but i do not think palytoxin was the cause in this case , more probable is an allergic reaction or some other reaction.


http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...e-0018235-t003



cheers

[Zoaelite]

Originally Posted by fishytime

so he was imagining his symptoms and the doctor was wrong?


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

Brought you back from the dead did I ?

Please note, at no time am I downplaying the need for protective gear when handling these species. Do some of these organisms contain the "Palytoxin" that ever one claims to be poisoned by? Yes.

Do all of them contain the toxin? No.

My point is this; there is a multitude of toxic compounds produced by ANY of the Cnidarians we keep in our tank take caution when handling or fragging any of these species.

I'm just very frustrated because I continuously see every Joe Blow and their dog posting how they almost just died from touching a coral that in reality doesn't contain the toxin they are so claiming. I'm a scientist, I have a tough time accepting things without some sort of proof. Please take a read through the PLOS article I posted, the conclusion is very relevant to your opinion at the moment.

I see two out comes from people reading these threads; 1) Protect myself because this $hit is scary and could kill me BUT 2) Well if the other 400+ people posted that they were fine after a day of be poisoned hey this stuff isn't all that bad.

In REALITY its this second opinion that scares me to the bone, the guy who orally inhaled the toxin was on corticosteroids for over 5 months after the incident and he still wasn't getting better. You don't get poisoned by this stuff and wake up the next day right as rain, its the second most toxin non peptide substance on the planet.

To give you an idea, the MOST venomous snake toxin on the planet belongs to the sea snake Hydrophis Belcheri, its LD50 is 0.025 mg/kg. Palytoxin is about 80X more toxic than this (LD50 of 0.0003 mg/ kg), one gram of the substance can kill approximately 170 Million mice.

OP in no way am I down playing your situation, I just find it difficult to believe as I'm an overly skeptical duch3 bag .

Originally Posted by jason604

Zoas containing palytoxin is more than real. Believe it or not but its not a certain type of zoas that contain palytoxin but it depends on each head/polyp. Most head of a colony or whatever size do not contain the toxin but it may be just 1 or 2 head within that group that may contain palytoxin. And the comment that "paly"toxin only Is in palys is totally wrong. There are a few Marine species that contain it and not only are they corals. They are also contained in some types of anemone and even a crab that's called(demania reynaudii). There's been documents of a person eating this crab and died of palytoxin poisoning. So this is type of toxin in zoas is more than just real and no chances should be made that(oooh my zoas are not poisonous and I don't need to be careful)

What your talking about is the act of bio-accumulation, some creatures are resistant to these toxins and actually ingest them to protect themselves. The rest of your statement perplexes me though, would you be so kind to post the source for this information.

Believe it or not but its not a certain type of zoas that contain palytoxin but it depends on each head/polyp. Most head of a colony or whatever size do not contain the toxin but it may be just 1 or 2 head within that group that may contain palytoxin. And the comment that "paly"toxin only Is in palys is totally wrong

I've posted a peer reviewed journal article which says otherwise, I would love to read your article though.

Originally Posted by toytech

I think the real moral of the story is don't drink the water ! Corals produce all kinds of things when ticked off and the last thing you want to do is ingest them . They have other toxins that you can have a reaction too and its not just zoas and palys .

^ Thank you, this is a statement I can really agree with.

[asylumdown]

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.

[slakker]

Well stated asylumdown... whether the OP did or did not get paly or zoa poisoned is quite irrelevant as there simply isn't enough evidence to show cause and effect. I don't doubt the OP was actually ill, but the diagnosis is simply a anecdotal correlation.

However, the fact that it can happen doesn't change the need for proper care and methods in handling these corals.