Water Change Dangers

It's not what you say

If you go back and read your first post in this thread, I think you will agree that your tone is “This is a direct order to newbies”.
Whether you want to agree or not some of the information in that first post is flat out misleading, wrong, or out of context.

You INVITED review and comment, and then got irritated when folks did just that.
And I’m sure you learned that the information, in the book you “quoted” from, is highly suspect to the folks replying to your opening statements.

I think the folks on the board responded very well, as always, with the intent of keeping newbies informed and presented with accurate information for them to experiment with.
 
To err on the side of caution is good practice. To advocate a meaningless practice because of lack of understanding is promoting myth.

The nitrification bacteria in FW tanks are are obligate attached bacteria. They are incapable of normal metabolism or of division without attachment. They are not found in the water column at all in metabolically functional form. Their attachment is quite firm - if it were not, how would fluidized bed filters function? C/mon folks, reality check time.

It would be an easier hobby if there were not so much misinformation in published material, but unfortunately there is a lot of misunderstood and chronically repeated poor to absolutely incorrect info out there.

If you want to be conservative, do more water changes.

If you want to be conservative, rinse biomedia in removed tank water.

Restricting water changes is not conservative.

Neglecting biomedia is not conservative.

Edit: There are many bacteria in the water column, some passively floating, many actively motile. But these are not, repeat not, nitrification bacteria. They are heterotrophic bacteria, which are also important to tank balance, but are not themselves at all involved in the nitrification process other than to contribute a bit of ammonia to it.
 
Last edited:
WOW everybody at this site is so intolerant of any comments made that go against what THEY think is right
Click to expand...

I find just the opposite, any comment with any kind of scientific basis is met with good review. yes there are skeptics, and some back and forth, but when good science and practices are put forth they are generally accepted.

I am sorry if you dis-agree, but if you do keep it to yourself. We have heard all the possible arguements and there isnt one that proves it is wrong or a bad thing to do it this way. So until you can prove its wrong or bad keep your negative opinions to yourselves
Click to expand...

Evidently my reply hadn't been read yet when this comment was made, but as you can see from it, there are many facts that disprove the information from the book, ands many facts as well as successful experiences that prove your book to be incorrect. The personal opinion of the supposed author of this book is the only thing that hasn't had any backing. Repeatedly saying that it is correct really proves nothing. Asking everyone with the facts to keep their comments to theirselves really goes against the idea of a discussion board. I for one would still like to know what the book was, and who the author was.

As far as when it is wrong or bad to do it this way. Any and every time there is any condition in the tank that requires large volume water changes and vaccuming. The advice you gave in your initial post will hinder the ability to engage on proper maintenance. Every day we see people here that have serious problems with their tank parrameters, and have refused to do enough water changes because someone such as the author of your book mis-informed them with false opinion instead of factual information. The author of the book you read has put forth information that is false based on assumptions not on science. I know this because I know the science behind the bio-filter, and I know that what he claims is a myth. I pointed that out so you too could see that the book was dead wrong, and there are reasons why.
Several other replies have reinforced this, and you still hold that an unsopported opinion should be given more credibility than factual science.
Dave
 
Well said, Daveedka.
Labont, we all appreciate your post and your good intentions to help people. Most of us here just felt the need to point out to you that this book you got your info from is not reliable and is based on the opinion of the author...not proven fact. There are many myths floating around in this hobby...some of which are very old yet still believed by many aquarists, unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
I just want to know how a water change caused a nitrAte spike.

Nitrate is the end product of a cycled tank. If you killed off the nitrifying bacteria you would see Ammonia and nothing else. Then as the tank started to cycle nitrItes.

But nitrAtes spiking from a water change?

That's bass ackwards.
 
I actually assumed that to be a mispelling as a nitrAte spike would not prove fatal to fish short term, but a nitrIte spike could. If it was in fact NitrAte then yes it would be extremely obvious that the bio-filter was still in good standing as you are pointing out Watcher. Even with a bio-filter only partially damaged ammonia would be the prevalent short term probem and the next two stages would be slower to spike.
Dave
 
Slappy*McFish said:
There are many myths floating around in this hobby...some of which are very old yet still believed by many aquarists, unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm just not very good at comprehension but I just get the sense that this has totally lost it's intent. Many myths??? Oh ya. I'm still so confused about most everything in this hobby. However, most myths are based on some truths - even if it's a relatively small truth.

When I read these posts, many people were making good points unfortunatly there were also 'digs' added at times that (for me) made the post lose it's intent. It is unfortunate that BOTH sides of this 'debate' have attacked individuals at times rather than the process itself.

The point of these forums is to improve ourselves and learn. For myself, a combination of what has been said makes perfect sense to me - and I really don't care if it's scientific or not - just that my fish and tank are healthy.

MY CONCLUSION: (which I will try to follow)
Water changes - sounds like the more the better but at least 50% once a week
Vacuuming - when ever doing water changes
Clean filter - one sponge at least once a week (but not all of them regardless of what has been said, I'll just feel better about it). Clean (1) entire filter unit at least once a month alternating the 2 every second week.

So I've learned a lot from both sides and hope that none of what I have said is offensive. It may not be scientific but what I have gathered is a combinations of some very smart, caring people so I know that it will be
good - even if there are other ways..
 
I also opt for the water changes. I do 50% every fived days or so because the tank is overstocked. At the same time I rinse the filter media. Things have always been good. Perhaps a change in the quality of your source water could be the culprit. The city can add stuff to your water. People on well water have to watch, if the city spreads salt on winter roads for example, some of this salt can get into your water supply.
 
Well you know I have to appologize for my mood yesterday I was a little grumpy so I do appologize to everybody.

Second I also apologize if my first post sounded like I was telling people to do this, that wasnt my intent. My intent was to merely make people aware of the situation and what this guy said. I copied the info as closely as I could remeber from this guys book and that is just the way it came out.

Third, I am aware that I asked for feedback but there were a few posts in here that were more intended at defamation of character and knowledge than stating opinions and giving feedback. And I got defensive. Feed back is when you let somebody know your opinion not when you try to make somebody look stupid. Which seemed like the intent of ONE person especially and it seemed the only reason that person did that was because it went against his/her beliefs and practices. Also I had agreed that the water change part was off in its percentages and you guys are still bringing it up in new posts which leads me to believe you are not reading the rest of the posts in this thread.

Anywho all water under the bridge
The bottom line is there is no harm to making sure you dont change and clean your filter media at the same time as doing water changes and gravel vaccuming. So if people choose to take this advice and do that they are totally entitled to do that. There are no negative affects to doing it this way so if you want to do it this way go ahead. There also seems to be no negative affects doing it the old fashioned way that you guys do. I was merely saying that this guy says it CAN, not will, but CAN increase the risk of something like this happening. Chances are it wont but hey, it happened to me, and nothing else was done to my tank that could have caused it. So I am merely letting people know that this COULD be another option. So if anybody chooses that this way is for them then I think everybody should respect that.

Again I apologize for being rude and also my lack of clarity in my first post
 
Well you know I have to appologize for my mood yesterday I was a little grumpy so I do appologize to everybody.
Click to expand...

Thanks, and in the case that any of my comments were taken as a personal shot they certainly weren't meant to be. I did send a Pm with some other comments not personal either, but am going to leave this alone unless you want to put part or all of the pm on this thread later.

AquaDummy, judging solely from your assesment, It may be time to change your user name to something more fitting. ;)
dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom