I think Ich is a farce

Status
Not open for further replies.
Great post KCombs, indeed science has a long way to go, but the published data should not be ignored with regard to infectious diseases. Protozoa and their treatment is certainly available to the general hobbyist. Nevertheless, we need to critically review our methods
especially ones without a scientific basis. Unfortunately, fraud and misinformation are far too common in human medicine let alone our Reef Microsystems. And the Internet propagates this to some degree. Save money and avoid the bracelet!
 
Well it looks like the OP has finally come to his senses. Looks like he realized that this hobby isn't about mimicking nature, it's just a glass box on the brink of destruction...always. Even if it's about keeping fish healthy to prevent such a protist infestation, we can't possibly feed our fish the diversity/quality of foods they utilize in nature to keep their immune systems in tip top shape, not to mention swimming space. I really hate sounding negative, but this post is just one of those rants where anything goes. I've had a lot of bad infestations. Ich, red planaria, Aefw, redbugs, zoaeating nudis, bryopsis, dictoya. Still battling some of them today. Just have to understand/respect its biology, and do whatever you can to beat it down to where it's not likely going to flourish and eventually be out competed/eradicated. At least hopefully if your up for the challenge ;)
 
I haven't done anything but think about what I posted initially tbh.

First, I'd like to apologize for seeming to be callous towards others beliefs. You are correct with me being unwilling to accept what has been "proven". However, understand, these are my observations and not someone else's. I'm going to try to call it as I see it with the tools that I have. My eyes. If they are contradictory to what has been "proven" then expect me to argue on that point. I will try to incorporate what I have read and learned to develop my own ideas in regards to the subject.

Now (I am asking this question because I honestly do not know the answer)... has there ever been a study on an established reef tank that has ich present in a non-malignant form? Meaning, a tank that has ich and will periodically show up as 1 or 2 spots here or there and has never been attributed to any deaths.

I ask this because, I feel it is becoming "domesticated". It's learning how to survive domestic life and that means not eliminating it's food source and thus eliminating itself. That .5%... that might be the benign domesticated strain. If that's the case the .5% is no longer .5%, it's grown.
 
Last edited:
I haven't done anything but think about what I posted initially tbh.

First, I'd like to apologize for seeming to be callous towards others beliefs. You are correct with me being unwilling to accept what has been "proven". However, understand, these are my observations and not someone else's. I'm going to try to call it as I see it with the tools that I have. My eyes. If they are contradictory to what has been "proven" then expect me to argue on that point. I will try to incorporate what I have read and learned to develop my own ideas in regards to the subject.

Now (I am asking this question because I honestly do not know the answer)... has there ever been a study on an established reef tank that has ich present in a non-malignant form? Meaning, a tank that has ich and will periodically show up as 1 or 2 spots here or there and has never been attributed to any deaths.

I ask this because, I feel it is becoming "domesticated". It's learning how to survive domestic life and that means not eliminating it's food source and thus eliminating itself. That .5%... that might be the benign domesticated strain. If that's the case the .5% is no longer .5%, it's grown.

So you are saying that the strain of ich out there that people have been repeatedly experiencing after a long period of fallow might not be as detrimental as everyone suggests?

Also that the copper and hypo resistant stains may be of the same nature?

I've had ich too after fallow period and I'm relieved to hear that... my fish have looked good, but still show spots here and there. Everyone eats well. It's seems like more a nuisance than harm.

Does this mean that I shouldn't worry about QT'ing fish because there is no worry of introducing ich being that they already have it?
 
Last edited:
So you are saying that the strain of ich out there that people have been repeatedly experiencing after a long period of fallow might not be as detrimental as everyone suggests?

Yes, being that it has been bred to survive in a captive enviorment and continues to do so I am suggesting exactly that.

Also that the copper and hypo resistant strains may be of the same nature?

Possibly, the fact that they are resistant to hypo and copper suggests the fact that they have experience and have built an immunity to those treatments which do not occur in nature. However, It's doesn't represent an extended life cycle, which is an important component to the suggested "benign" form of ich.

I've had ich too after fallow period and I'm relieved to hear that... my fish have looked good, but still show spots here and there. Everyone eats well. It's seems like more a nuisance than harm.

Does this mean that I shouldn't worry about QT'ing fish because there is no worry of introducing ich being that they already have it?

You should always QT. Although my initial post did not suggest it and I apologize for all the confusion it caused... there are still wild strains of ich. The wild strains tend to have accelerated reproductive life cycles and I would guess given the benign nature of the "domesticated" ich also breed in far greater numbers than the ich you are used to seeing.
 
Last edited:
This thread reminds me of a story about learning that Will Rogers, a famous humorist from the 1920's and 1930's once told. It goes something like this :

Most people learn by reading ; some by observing the success of others; and, then there are a rare few with the special genius enabling them to pee on an electric fence more than once.

So if the science is inconvenient or doesn't fit whatever you happen to think at the moment ; just make up your own and wait for those other special genii to meet you at the fence for a few beers.
 
there are a rare few with the special genius enabling them to pee on an electric fence more than once.

You ok bro? I don't know if pee'in on an electric fence is such a good idea... especially for a 2nd time.


Why are you so quick to strike down reason? This is thought, most people have it. It is applied to your hobby. A hobby in which you are part of, a magazine which documents it.

Strike my opinion down.

One foul swoop.

You should be able to do that.

I am highschool educated.

I did not graduate college. I majored in cinematography and I gave it up for a career.

Strike my theory down into the dirt so no one will ever bring up the points that I have brought up... Tom
 
Last edited:
My training is in chemistry and not in biology, BUT I have to make a biochemical distiction here. It is entirely possible that we could select for a strain of crypt that is hypo resistant....after all we know some survive down to a SG of 1.016....so 1.009 is not that far a strech. But I have a hard time believing in a copper resistent strain. The mechanism by which copper poisons....even in humans, it not something that could be easily evolved away....or that exists in some limited form already.

These things having been said, I have abandoned copper for Choloroquine phosphate in the last year. I feel it is much easier on the fish, and they eat better during treatment.
 
James, it pays to learn from the mistakes of others. The people here in general have a vast amount of knowledge and experience that you should pay attention to...

I believe that you are not truely trolling, but have come to this conclusion through your observations.

As Laurie noted, it's hard to believe it when you follow the standard operating procedure to deal with an ich outbreak and it continually fails miserably. I can understand your conclusions, but it is incorrect to assume.

Everyone who has participated in this discussion, please raise your hand if you have had this parasite verified. Not a single hand, ok maybe one. Every one of us treats our visual observations this way and it can be successful. The truth is probably that you are not dealing with cryptocaryon irritans and you should have someone look at it. Do you have a local university? Call their biology dept and ask someone for a quick answer. You can bring the fish in and a culture or biopsy can be taken. Most microbiologist would be happy to have one of their TAs look at it and help you out. There might be a new bad guy out there now, and we need to know it ASAP.

James, I would like to give you one piece of advice. You acknowledge that you are a newbie to the saltwater world, and that you don't have a formal education. That being said, It would probably be wise to blindly accept the advice from those people on here with 20k plus in post counts, at least for a while. They are the veterans and have proven themselves. I don't mean for you to ignore research and stop asking questions, but I would listen and take it to heart when someone like TMZ, bean, bertoni, randy, and nanoook just for a few examples tells you about their experience. Many of us are microbiologists, marine biologist, chemists, etc etc etc. plus having 15+ years in the hobby. I would trust their gut feeling over newbies observations any day.

I hope this didn't come off as mean or antagonistic, but sometimes medicine is hard to swallow, and sometimes we have to say things bluntly and to the point to get the message across when someone is being argumentative and they do have any facts to back up their statements, just a bunch of assumptions.

Then again, who am I? Someone with very few posts...
 
TL;DR Summary: OP - "I have been lucky, therefore I think I'm smart."

I've been in a few substantial car cashes and very luckily never been injured, but it would be absurd for me to assert that car crashes aren't dangerous...
 
It's worth pointing out perhaps that the mythbusters looked at fecal coliforms, not fecal staph. Fecal coliform is perfectly harmless, lacking the genes to infect humans. Staphylococcus can't survive in fecal matter, and does cause infections.

Many of us do walk around with Staph aureus infections, but we don't live in a box filled with our own filth.
 
Mythbusters also debunked the "peeing on the fence" myth too.. Apparently it's ok to do as long as you are more than 3 inches away from the fence............
 
Best thread evah.

Mythbusters did fecal coliforms on toothbrushes in the bathroom and peeing on an electric fence was more about the stream being non contiguous than distance, though distance impacts the continuity of the stream.
 
I took a 10 year break, I guess to see people still argue about ich

never had it kill a fish, have had stress cause it to flair up, always treated the cause not the fish or ich
 
You are right that you dont have any answers but your ignorance is not helping. The treatments do work... youre just bitter because you failed to use them properly.

This about sums up this pi$$ poor thread... Friggen noobs... Read as much as I could... Can't deal with the ignorance and stupidity being spread anymore...
 
I don't know if ich is now a puppy that just play with fish is the jason cousin, the only thing i know is the only fish in my tank that died from ich is the one that introduce ick to the tank, it was a caribbean blue tang, after that i have introduce about 8 fish 5 of the tangs and none have died even my blue tang that are suppose to be an ich magnet just a few spot for a few days and have been fine for more than 3 months.

People in hobbies tend to repeat what other say, and noobs get scare from comments made by almost noobs (people with 2-3 years) that talks like they are hobby gurus.

The best treatment for ick is good food and a good enviroment for your fish.
 
I hate to dig up an older thread especially for a first post but....

"The problem is you are challenging things that are thoroughly documented by biologists, millions of dollars of research by marine aquaculture facilities, and decades of anecdotal evidence from hobbyists."
Millions of dollars on ICH and we don't know how long to fallow a tank for? If another animal other than a "fish" can harbor it? True vaccine?

Also one of the links provided says,
"Fish that survive a Cryptocaryon infection develop immunity, which can prevent significant disease for up to 6 months (Burgess 1992; Burgess and Matthews 1995). However, these survivors may act as carriers and provide a reservoir for future outbreaks (Colorni and Burgess 1997)."
How long are they carriers?

I'm with Floyd, they can stay in a fish and resist treatment. I don't believe that a tank can be completely devoid of ICH.
 
All right, I'll toss a quarter in the slot.
I have seen ich once in the last 12 years. It went away, never repeated, through one house move and 4 more years. Hobbyists of my persuasion don't get the pest often and it usually doesn't amount to much if we do...a) reef. The water is kept spot on with an ato and kalk drip. b) no 'midwater' fish like tangs and angels, puffers, etc, all the thin-skinned types that seem to be ich magnets. c) mostly sand-dwelling fish like blennies, gobies, mandys, dartfish, or damsels. Damsels are, of that class, the most likely to have trouble, but not if they're not exposed.

My own theory: the ich life cycle involves the sandbed. Look at a reef cam, on a living reef. The midwater fishes never come near the sandbed. They're up and about, constantly hunting their food where THEY live. They have thin skins, super streamlined, not that great a slime coat compared to some. The sanddwellers, OTOH, living in the sandbed like jawfish, hunting close to the bottom like mandys (champion slime producers), and the little rock-suckers like blennies and hole-dwellers like gobies and dartfish ---are all inclined to have a nice slime coat. And to have natural defense against this pest.

OK. I've been at this over sixty years. I've seen tank-keeping mutate considerably, and we *used* to have a hard problem to dodge. What we have now is a LOT easier to keep disease free, because of the automations.

WHO in this hobby loses fish to ich? For starters---novices, who haven't got the automations yet, who don't know how to test their water (or who just don't), who don't know how to watch their corals for signals [in the sometime absence of tests], or who run fish-only tanks not because that's their really considered decision, but because they're new and they think those tanks are easier [from my viewpoint, they're far harder.] The combo of novice, inappropriate tanks, less apt equipment, inexperience at choosing healthy fish, buying cheap fish (from sources that aren't as careful themselves), and water quality bouncing all over the scale because of mistakes or lack of tests or topoff equipment---all of these set up novice tanks to be far from ich-free. One a person gets past that stage---sure, there are people who use a combination of skill and luck and don't have problems. Others seem to live under a ich-prone cloud...though I suspect its a gap in their procedures, one of the most glaring of which (purely IMHO) is the tendency to lose fish and replace them, each one of which is a chance for the pest to get in: I think I've acquired one fish in the last 3 years.

Quarantine rock and corals? Not this person. And again---ich just isn't a problem for me. It doesn't like my fishes. Doesn't find many chances in my tank. It's a poor dumb little lifeform that succeeds best where it has a multitude of chances; where chances like irritated gills and bad slime coat from low alkalinity are non-existent, it has a harder time, and if it can't find a host, that individual ich-let dies unfulfilled, without reproducing, within a relatively short time.

So, yes, we have quite a time with it among novices. And people learn to run scared of it. It's not super-bug. It is a problem if your tank has had a problem, and if you've just won the prize fish in the ich-prone lottery...at the same time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top