Zeovit Spur 2

[lduncan]

Oh god. Taken so far out of contex they are misleading. Something you do commonly. Please stop it. If you are going to quote me, do it responsibly, in context, without cutting sentences in half, and without changing the meaning of what's said.

wasp, I don't need to test your water. You know why? Because I am not saying the system doesn't work! I'm not even saying that adding bacteria is completely useless.

I'm not criticising anyone personally for no reason. But when you continues to misconstrue what I have said and twist it into some sort of "zeo bashing" statement then I am justified in saying these things. You constantly say I have said things that I have not. It's annoying.

I'm done on this topic. There is so much crap surrounding zeovit it's just beyond a joke.

If this is the case then you should be asking the manufacturer why they are misleading you then.

Have you investigated this further yet. Managed to find out why i say this?

Also, you are quick to discount my statements, why are you not just as suspicious of Thomas Pohl's? He at least has a strong motive for spreading misinformation.

Why would I just make up the stuff i have said? What motive do I have?

Now people may see why I question the reading comprehension of zeo users. Why they continually go round in circles chasing their tails over things which are never said.

You think the manufacturer has an understanding of how the system works? If they did they wouldn't be selling a product with the following warnings. Nor would they be changing the recommended dosages every few weeks.

zeovit

zeobak

zeostart

I say, that continually dosing bacteria is pointless because;

1) If conditions are correct, bacteria will grow and multiply themselves. Making subsequent dosing of very little benefit.

2) If conditions are not correct, no matter how much bacteria you add, it will never colonise.

Um, the zeolites are of limited use in terms of ion exchange, to the point of being irrelevant. Even when fresh, and any effect diminishes even further as bacterial colonies cover the surface. This is contrary to the claims made by the manufactures. Natural zeolites (which zeovit clearly is) do not exchange significant amounts of ammonia in non sterile saltwater, and the absorbtion which does take place reduces substantially when colonised by bacteria.

... Which is the reason I said I was wrong earlier. The zeoguide is still wrong in it's claim, which was why I stated that in the first place.

I believe that zeovit does not work solely by dropping parameters such as nitrate and phosphate. And does not work as described in the zeoguide.

Ok I admit I was wrong there. After further research on zeolite composition and sources, I have altered my position. Although I accept it's not at all evident, that statement was referring to the claim that zeolites are effective at ion exchange in saltwater. But as written, yes I now believe it is wrong. Also a lot of my postings do not include important qualifyers, for the simple fact that my posts would be 3 time longer than they already are, and I couldn't handle that.

As far as not being neutral. I am. I look at all the observation, not just the ones which are convenient or desirable. It's part of being truly objective. It's these particular observations ie, the not so common or desirable ones where you can get the most information on the true nature of what's going on.

So back to zeospur 2, any comments on this?

It is possible with this product to influence the amount of zooxanthellae in the coral tissue. The coral itself has more energy for growth because the zooxanthellae density requires less energy. This is possible for acropora, anacropora and montipora. The reduction of zooxanthellae in the outer layers brings out the colors of the coral from deeper layers. Zeospur2 is also able to influence colors. However, the primary color shown will be the color right below the layer with the zooxanthellae. It is possible to reduce the amount of zooxanthellae so much that the coral will not get enough energy via photosynthesis.

After reading this, the general idea behind how the product works seems obvious. Anyone want to state the obvious?

Layton

[lduncan]

Why post this stuff that proves nothing? You do that all the time.

:roll:

I said increased growth isn't always a reliable way of determining coral health.

You said

Please nobody tell me better growth is not a sign of good health, that's ludicrous.

Then I posted info from the EPA showing that to them the current information around growth rates under stress is too inconclusive to use as a bioindicator in their framework for monitoring reef health.

So in fact it shows that my comment was not ludicrous like you suggested.

(Also you shouldn't bandy the word "proof" around like you do. If your looking for true scientific proof then you will be sorely disappointed in this hobby. Often the best you will do is finding significant amounts of evidence.)

Layton

[Warren]

Warning, this thread has degraded into the all to familiar name calling childish banter so typical in the saltwater section. You are in danger of receiving warnings.

Cool off, pull your heads in and return to helpful posts only or don't bother posting at all (goes for everyone)...