Ginger works with ich... Every time I use it

Status
Not open for further replies.
HumbleFish said:
But before it even got to the point where we're experimenting on fish, a scientist with a group of tomonts could experiment with ginger and see how it affects the theronts once released. See how it affects all the life cycles.
Click to expand...

IF it works by effecting the ich and not the fish. Even if proven to not effect the life cycle at all, it wouldn't prove lack of effectiveness.
I'm only continuing to argue as when I've thought "in depth" on the subject, I've kind of come to the conclusion that the only reef safe treatment that would ever really have the possibility of working would be a treatment that worked directly on the fish, not on the parasite. The things that kill the parasite are almost always going to kill other inverts as their tolerances to most things run in the same ranges. IF you could treat the fish to enhance or "poison" their slime coats such that the parasite cannot attach, it dies in the same manner as it does when you fallow a tank. Its a "theoretical" thinking, but its the best conclusion my simple mind could proffer.
I am in no way endorsing the use of ginger or any other treatment for ich.. or that anyone run a "test". Ich is a pain the the arse, but preventable and treatable, and while the treatments are not convenient or easy, they work. So new thoughts on the subject are welcome, but experimentation with a "curable" disease/parasite is often unwarranted given the high probability of loss of life.
 
spieszak said:
IF it works by effecting the ich and not the fish. Even if proven to not effect the life cycle at all, it wouldn't prove lack of effectiveness.
I'm only continuing to argue as when I've thought "in depth" on the subject, I've kind of come to the conclusion that the only reef safe treatment that would ever really have the possibility of working would be a treatment that worked directly on the fish, not on the parasite. The things that kill the parasite are almost always going to kill other inverts as their tolerances to most things run in the same ranges. IF you could treat the fish to enhance or "poison" their slime coats such that the parasite cannot attach, it dies in the same manner as it does when you fallow a tank. Its a "theoretical" thinking, but its the best conclusion my simple mind could proffer.
I am in no way endorsing the use of ginger or any other treatment for ich.. or that anyone run a "test". Ich is a pain the the arse, but preventable and treatable, and while the treatments are not convenient or easy, they work. So new thoughts on the subject are welcome, but experimentation with a "curable" disease/parasite is often unwarranted given the high probability of loss of life.
Click to expand...

I don't know if we're fully understanding one another. At present, all of the "proven methods" only work on the theront/free-swimming stage, save TT which basically outruns the parasite's life cycle. There is no known "proven method" which affects any other stage of Crypto's life cycle, including the trophonts (white spots) on the fish. So, the very first step to prove/disprove ginger's effectiveness would be to test how it effects theronts in a lab environment. If it eradicated them, next would be to test how safe it is to use on a fish in a QT environment. Run the fish thru the same QT procedure as when using copper, but substitute the copper for ginger. Multiple tests would need to be done on different infected fish, microscopic check of the gills multiple times post treatment and an effective concentration of ginger would need to be determined. If this same concentration of ginger were next proven to be safe in the presence of corals/inverts, then you might really have something. Otherwise, it's just a substitution for copper and only safe to use in a QT (or perhaps FO) environment.

A lot of IFs ANDs or BUTs to be sure; and I agree with you that people should just prophylactically treat and/or QT in the first place. I personally do both. But we all know the vast majority are never going to do that. So the quest for a "reef safe" Ich treatment will forever continue. And IMO; no stone should be left unturned and no claim of a "reef safe" cure should just be easily dismissed.
 
HumbleFish said:
I don't know if we're fully understanding one another. At present, all of the "proven methods" only work on the theront/free-swimming stage, save TT which basically outruns the parasite's life cycle. There is no known "proven method" which affects any other stage of Crypto's life cycle, including the trophonts (white spots) on the fish. So, the very first step to prove/disprove ginger's effectiveness would be to test how it effects theronts in a lab environment. If it eradicated them, next would be to test how safe it is to use on a fish in a QT environment. Run the fish thru the same QT procedure as when using copper, but substitute the copper for ginger. Multiple tests would need to be done on different infected fish, microscopic check of the gills multiple times post treatment and an effective concentration of ginger would need to be determined. If this same concentration of ginger were next proven to be safe in the presence of corals/inverts, then you might really have something.

A lot of IFs ANDs or BUTs to be sure; and I agree with you that people should just prophylactically treat and/or QT in the first place. I personally do both. But we all know the vast majority are never going to do that. So the quest for a "reef safe" Ich treatment will forever continue. And IMO; no stone should be left unturned and no claim of a "reef safe" cure should just be easily dismissed.
Click to expand...

We are most definitely NOT understanding each other. The first step you note is moot if the treatment works on the fish not the parasite. Treatment do NOT have to entail actively killing the parasite. Theoretically treatment can work solely on the fish, such that if the fish cannot be infected by the parasite, it cannot continue its life-cycle as it needs the fish to live. That is what fallowing a tank does. When you fallow a tank, the lack of fish stops the life-cyle, because there is no host for the parasite.
Some fish are highly resistant to ich, such as mandarins because their think slime coat doesn't allow the parasite to attach. Some fish are "ich magnets" such as tangs.. Thin slime coats make them easily infect able.
If you can treat the fish, such that the ich cannot attach, by thickening their slime coat, or having them excrete something into their slime coat that is harmful or deadly to the parasite, you can stop the life cycle. This is the theory behind why garlic has shown some mild success. The parasite isn't equipped to handle what the fish excretes into the slime coat when fed garlic. Garlic will not cure your tank from ich, and recent findings have shown garlic is really bad for fish livers. I'm not advising it, just noting why it does have some effect on the parasite.
So, what I'm saying is that if you were to find something that treats the fish (ie through their slime coat or other) such that the parasite cannot attach, it will starve and break the life-cycle in the same manner as fallowing a tank.... and if that is what might/possibly/could be occurring in this scenario, testing what ginger does to the parasite (regardless of the stage) is moot.

(note, I'm not trying to sound harsh, I'm trying to be clear. Please don't take it any other way)
 
spieszak said:
We are most definitely NOT understanding each other. The first step you note is moot if the treatment works on the fish not the parasite. Treatment do NOT have to entail actively killing the parasite. Theoretically treatment can work solely on the fish, such that if the fish cannot be infected by the parasite, it cannot continue its life-cycle as it needs the fish to live. That is what fallowing a tank does. When you fallow a tank, the lack of fish stops the life-cyle, because there is no host for the parasite.
Some fish are highly resistant to ich, such as mandarins because their think slime coat doesn't allow the parasite to attach. Some fish are "ich magnets" such as tangs.. Thin slime coats make them easily infect able.
If you can treat the fish, such that the ich cannot attach, by thickening their slime coat, or having them excrete something into their slime coat that is harmful or deadly to the parasite, you can stop the life cycle. This is the theory behind why garlic has shown some mild success. The parasite isn't equipped to handle what the fish excretes into the slime coat when fed garlic. Garlic will not cure your tank from ich, and recent findings have shown garlic is really bad for fish livers. I'm not advising it, just noting why it does have some effect on the parasite.
So, what I'm saying is that if you were to find something that treats the fish (ie through their slime coat or other) such that the parasite cannot attach, it will starve and break the life-cycle in the same manner as fallowing a tank.... and if that is what might/possibly/could be occurring in this scenario, testing what ginger does to the parasite (regardless of the stage) is moot.

(note, I'm not trying to sound harsh, I'm trying to be clear. Please don't take it any other way)
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying about strengthening a fish's mucous coat to repel a parasite invasion. The problem is the skin is not even the first choice for parasites such as Ich. Ich can avoid the skin altogether, harbor in a fish's gills, feed there and continue it's life cycle. The gills offer the path of least resistance. This is why some can go months/years without ever seeing any white spots on their fish, and then bam! suddenly it's everywhere. The trophonts have been coming & going in the gills, continuing the life cycle, waiting for a "stressor event" to occur. Once that happens the fish's immune system gets compromised, and the trophonts are now ready to move onto the weakened skin area. Their numbers greatly increase due to the increased feeding area now available, and multiple fish deaths are imminent as they are about to be overrun by parasites whose numbers had previously been kept in check.
 
I agree. I wasn't fighting the idea that the parasite can/will continue to live even with a high mucous coat. What I'm fighting against is the idea that a treatment must work to actively kill the parasite. Again, its "theoretical", but if the fish's tissue can work against the parasite (mucous coat included) then that renders the effect of the treatment directly on the parasite moot. And again, I'm only noting is as in my limited knowledge, tank wide treatment isn't likely to ever be reef safe since as I noted previously the tolerances of inverts seem to be pretty standard.. so killing the parasite is likely to kill most if not all inverts in a tank wide treatment. So, if we are going to find a reef safe treatment, I personally think the best shot at that would be to find a treatment such that the fish metabolizes it in a way that that is what kills the parasite, or makes it such that the fish will no longer serve as a host.
 
spieszak said:
I agree. I wasn't fighting the idea that the parasite can/will continue to live even with a high mucous coat. What I'm fighting against is the idea that a treatment must work to actively kill the parasite. Again, its "theoretical", but if the fish's tissue can work against the parasite (mucous coat included) then that renders the effect of the treatment directly on the parasite moot. And again, I'm only noting is as in my limited knowledge, tank wide treatment isn't likely to ever be reef safe since as I noted previously the tolerances of inverts seem to be pretty standard.. so killing the parasite is likely to kill most if not all inverts in a tank wide treatment. So, if we are going to find a reef safe treatment, I personally think the best shot at that would be to find a treatment such that the fish metabolizes it in a way that that is what kills the parasite, or makes it such that the fish will no longer serve as a host.
Click to expand...

What you are advocating is Ich management. And while I no longer practice that, I don't bash it. I just got tired of the ups & downs, so I moved on to Ich eradication - religiously QT, prophylactically treat. You might be very interested to read some posts by Paul B on here. I've included a link to one of his articles at the bottom of this post. He advocates keeping fish in "breeding condition" thru proper nutrition to repel parasites. He feeds live blackworms, soaks pellets in fish oil, etc. Hard to argue with a man that has a 40 y/o reef tank, where fish live to be 20 and spawn regularly. ;)

http://www.reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/7-paul-baldassanos-40-year-old-reef
 
HumbleFish said:
What you are advocating is Ich management. And while I no longer practice that, I don't bash it. I just got tired of the ups & downs, so I moved on to Ich eradication - religiously QT, prophylactically treat. You might be very interested to read some posts by Paul B on here. I've included a link to one of his articles at the bottom of this post. He advocates keeping fish in "breeding condition" thru proper nutrition to repel parasites. He feeds live blackworms, soaks pellets in fish oil, etc. Hard to argue with a man that has a 40 y/o reef tank, where fish live to be 20 and spawn regularly. ;)

http://www.reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/7-paul-baldassanos-40-year-old-reef
Click to expand...
I AM NOT! I AM 100% not. I agree that Paul B has a remarkable tank, but in no way am I advocating or advising that.
What I am saying is that I think the "future" of a reef safe cure has to lie in treating the fish not the tank. This reef safe cure would be fed for upwards of 10 weeks, which would replace the fallow period on a tank. I'm in no way saying this exists, nor am I saying its even possible. What I'm saying is that treating the fish rather than treating the tank seems the only possibility to me as far as how one would go about creating a reef safe treatment. Something that metabolizes in the fish has the possibility of only killing something that wants to feed off the fish as opposed to something that is broadcast in the water.
You don't tend to find a specific compound that kills a specific undesired invert without effecting other inverts. I'm proposing that to solve that problem, you target the food source of the undesired invert, just like when you have algae you target its food source. When nutrients come under control, so does algae.
What I'm saying is that in my mind in order to have a reef safe treatment, I think its likely that it is going to have to solve the problem by working through the food source for the parasite, not through the water column.
 
I cured ich 2 times with freshly juiced garlic not extract the agent that kills parasites has a limited life and is not present in extract you buy of the shelf cant remember where I read it but worked for me on my sailfin tang on 2 separate occasions
 
spieszak said:
I AM NOT! I AM 100% not. I agree that Paul B has a remarkable tank, but in no way am I advocating or advising that.
What I am saying is that I think the "future" of a reef safe cure has to lie in treating the fish not the tank. This reef safe cure would be fed for upwards of 10 weeks, which would replace the fallow period on a tank. I'm in no way saying this exists, nor am I saying its even possible. What I'm saying is that treating the fish rather than treating the tank seems the only possibility to me as far as how one would go about creating a reef safe treatment. Something that metabolizes in the fish has the possibility of only killing something that wants to feed off the fish as opposed to something that is broadcast in the water.
You don't tend to find a specific compound that kills a specific undesired invert without effecting other inverts. I'm proposing that to solve that problem, you target the food source of the undesired invert, just like when you have algae you target its food source. When nutrients come under control, so does algae.
What I'm saying is that in my mind in order to have a reef safe treatment, I think its likely that it is going to have to solve the problem by working through the food source for the parasite, not through the water column.
Click to expand...

OK, so maybe what you are advocating is something like Dr. G's. Link here. Chloroquine phosphate, which as far as I am concerned is a "proven method" when dosed in the water column. But Dr. G's soaks CP in the food. Only problem is I've heard a lot of people have trouble getting their fish to eat this stuff.
 
I'm not advocating anything. But, yes, in theory I think the delivery method for that product is how a reef safe treatment would likely have to work. Its all theory. To my knowledge there isn't a product that does work other than the accepted methods, none of which are a reef safe treatment.
Again, while it would be great to have a reef safe cure, ich is preventable and treatable, and proper QT should be used regardless as there are things much worse than ich that you need to be concerned with.
 
SeargentSlice said:
I cured ich 2 times with freshly juiced garlic not extract the agent that kills parasites has a limited life and is not present in extract you buy of the shelf cant remember where I read it but worked for me on my sailfin tang on 2 separate occasions
Click to expand...

Sorry to chime in here but if you had to treat twice how is that you can say it was cured?
 
Back when I drag raced, if I spit on the left rear tire I won the race. If I didn't spit on the left rear tire, or didn't get a good hit with the spit I lost the race. Therefore it is easy to see the connection between spit on the left rear tire and winning the race. Since it worked every time it is obvious that was the deciding factor in winning.

I wonder if using a little crushed up Mary Ann would work better than Ginger, perhaps Mrs. Howell, it would be a shame to crush up either Ginger or Mary Ann. I doubt Thurston would mind very much.
 
I have a 36 gallon tank that has been fallow for about 3 months and has some soft corals in it, I will find a Ich covered fish and try ginger powered and see what happens.
 
I agree with ingtar shinowa it just real up in here :lolspin:......This is a interesting thread tagging along on this
 
I think it's awesome! Putting ginger in your tank is no more ridiculous sounding than, say, garlic. Worst case scenario is you are no better or worse off than just doing nothing. People laughed at alprazo for years about an anti-malarial drug working to treat Ich; now there's a 28 page thread devoted to Chloroquine phosphate, which has convinced many folks to throw their little bottle of copper poison away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Paul B
Earthworms as fish food
Replies
4
Views
146
xLennie
xLennie
RadReefer82_Cube60
I messed up BIG time…
2
Replies
20
Views
919
griss
griss
K
Yellow Tang QT
Replies
6
Views
284
Kirino
K
D
Algae issue - and I feel like I've tried everything
2
Replies
21
Views
565
JCOLE
JCOLE
J
Phosphate Drowning My System
Replies
8
Views
442
Timfish
Timfish
Back
Top