How do you peform your water changes?

[H3D]

So in the end they are really not that scientific, they give you stats on the amount that is bad for your fish's health, but they base the fish's health on their 'observations' just like my source does but with different conclusions apparently.

What makes it a "scientific" observation is the agreement of thousands of scientists who observed the same results and agreed upon their causes. A "general" observation is what you and two bad fish keepers with poor eyesight thought you observed.

 

[RockabillyChick]

when you can TASTE chlorine in the water, its pretty safe to bet that the fish will know its there.

and jay, if you've ever taken a high school science class, you would know that part of any and every scientific process is observation. scientists observing a control and several test subjects for any changes at all, then repeating the expiriment many, many times to find patterns in the changes that occour. just because a machine is not making the observations does not make it any less scientific.

like i told you over and over in chat, the reason your Bailey borothers claim that chlorine kills off certain pathogens, is because it does! chlorine is a noxious chemical used to kill bacteria and some viruses. it is added to tap water for that specific purpose. it kills things! and over time, it can and will kill your fish.

 

[Rallysman]

Another reason im and advocate for drip systems. A carbon filter will remove chlorine (not chloramine though) and you dont have to worry about high doses of anything.

Plus, you dont have to worry about water changes lol
No water changes for almost 4 months on a heavlily stocked tank with nitrates less than 15ppm makes me and the fish happy. They dont even have to deal with temperature or water fluctuations

 

[sumthin fishy]

What kind of complecations? And no I dont' mean with high dose of chlorine in the tank, I mean with the amount of chlorine you would normally bring to the tank when you do 20 percent water change. I don't want to explain myself again with high chlorine levels.

The information provided was from the EPA. I dont doubt that thier study includes autopsies, control groups, as well as deals with thousands of fish. I would take the word of their scientists over that of a single fishkeeper any day. While they did not state any complications other than death(I guess death isnt so bad then?), It has already been piointed out that chlorine will cause damage to thier gills. I cant see how that is a good thing. I also do not see how you can consider chlorine levels 10 times that of what is safe for fish "low". Thier observations go much further than wheather or not the fish are alive on a day to day basis. There is no real science in saying "if a fish is alive, it is healthy". You can keep a golfish alive in a bowl for over a year. Does that make it OK?

 

[jay733]

What I'm saying is, we dont' know the nitty gritty of their experiments and how they are basing their knowledge.

For example you can put a fish you got from a pet shop in a tank of just 20 percent untreated water and if that fish has a disease your going to say oh it's because of the cholorine? That fish's disease could be from several different factors.

The only way we really know if it bothers fish, and again i rephrase only 20 percent of untreated water when you do water changes, is if we can measure the fish's stress level "scientifically" and not observational.

Observational is risky because for instance if we are observing a fish to study if it looks like it's enjoying itself in the tank, we can be biased to look for behavior that is really not there to confirm your common held believe. That's why I'm saying there is really no scientific research that measures this.

And yeah maybe a lot of scientist agree with the theory that even the slightest amount of chlorine is bad for your fish, but again, if they dont' measure the fish's stress level scientifically by means of sensors or something, it doesn't hold much water.

 

[Rallysman]

Someone just likes to argue.

I'm not saying names or pointing fingers...just stating the obvious

 

[jay733]

I"m don't like to argue, I'm trying to prove a point.

 

[sumthin fishy]

The point you are trying to prove is that scientific research can be disproved by a statement from a single fishkeeper. While initially your argument could be viewed as viable, it has been disproven. At this point I think it warrents no further discussion. Thank you for keeping your end of the debate civil.

 

[mr_bentley78]

What kind of complecations? And no I dont' mean with high dose of chlorine in the tank, I mean with the amount of chlorine you would normally bring to the tank when you do 20 percent water change. I don't want to explain myself again with high chlorine levels.

And as you notice you say scientific 'observations' so they are observing the fish as well, so how scientific are your eyes? Just as scientific are the eyes of the Bailey brothers that say they do better with untreated water from their observations.

And furthermore, observing bad health in tank can be signals of other factors, health, food, handling, other aggressive fish, all can change the health of a fish and this can easily be mistaken by the scientists to be because of cholorine in the water. So in the end they are really not that scientific, they give you stats on the amount that is bad for your fish's health, but they base the fish's health on their 'observations' just like my source does but with different conclusions apparently.

When proving a theory in science, you have only one variable at a time. A process of elimination, if you will. It's a controlled test. These guys don't just throw 10 random fish into a tank, feed them random amounts of food, and do random water changes / maintenance. Not to mention, you can tell if a chemical is causing problems due to tracing it through the fish's blood stream. See if it's causing any changes to natural body functions and so forth.

Here's what I think you're picturing Jay. 2 guys in lab coats, with a 20 gal tank and 5 semi-aggressive / community fish in it. Lost of pretty flowers and decor and such. Doing 20% wc's one week, 50% wc's another. Feeding them un-measured amounts of food (what they think the fish can eat in 2-3 minutes). And saying "aha!, The fish are dying and it's GOT TO BE the chlorine."

There is only one factor tested. A single fish, in a controlled environment, with the measured reccomended amount of food dosage given at specific intervals, with un-conditioned (chlorine contaminated water). Either set specifically just above the maximum amount, or right at it. And seeing how the fish does. They repeat this process with multiple fish, to eliminate any defects in the fish chosen.

This leaves no error in fish aggression, overall health of said fish, over feeding / underfeeding, or any other variable that might contaminate the end results.

Like I said, it's a "process of elimination" way to go about it. Everything is controlled to be in specifics.

I'm being fairly vague as I have never tried to test anything with fish, as I'm no scientist, but I do understand the basics of testing a theory. I did my share of science fair projects lol.

 

[H3D]

The only way we really know if it bothers fish, and again i rephrase only 20 percent of untreated water when you do water changes, is if we can measure the fish's stress level "scientifically" and not observational.

Observational is risky because for instance if we are observing a fish to study if it looks like it's enjoying itself in the tank, we can be biased to look for behavior that is really not there to confirm your common held believe. That's why I'm saying there is really no scientific research that measures this.

And yeah maybe a lot of scientist agree with the theory that even the slightest amount of chlorine is bad for your fish, but again, if they dont' measure the fish's stress level scientifically by means of sensors or something, it doesn't hold much water.

What you are not understanding is that this can be measured scientifically though observation. Fish show "physical" signs of stress and or pain such as erratic swimming, gasping for breath, flashing. Why can you not grasp this.