skeeter_ca
New member
No one said they will last forever. After they show any signs of wear toss'em and use a new one.
skeeter
skeeter
magic eraser
- Thread starter Beans21
- Start date
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
But that's the point. :/ What happened to the part that wore away...
whiteshark
New member
No, you can prove it doesn't affect things, but you have to actually try.
And if you use this in the tank to "scrub" anything, it will come apart. I had a physicist tell me there's no physics involved. I asked him if he used zero force then? (yes, that's a smart joke, but definitive truth)
This thing, can, and will over time, degrade from abrasion in your tank. And as it does, it's particulate matter. What consumes particulate matter in our tanks and even covers themselves in a mucous to get particulates to stick to them? Yes, corals.
Someone else chimed in another post and said, "what's the big deal, my fish eats parts of it when it breaks apart and it's still alive?!"
I think the point is proven. There's quite a few studies now on the effects of small man-made particulates affecting marine environments.
To anyone that uses it though, +1 for keeping it real and introducing pollution to your tank
I don't necessarily disagree with the idea behind what you're saying. It's the way you present it. Because you think it might be detrimental does not mean your opinion is more valid than someone who has been using the thing for years with no effect. The onus isn't more on someone saying it doesn't effect things than someone who says it does. You have the same responsibility to prove it does as a person who says it doesn't. There have been some quick, albeit rather unscientific experiments that show corals are actually somewhat selective to what they eat. I've yet to see any scientific evidence to sway me towards either side of this argument. What I do know if that many people have used this for years and have had no I'll effects. But there is a reason I still hesitate to use it.
gone fishin
New member
Magic eraser part deux,
whiteshark
New member
Disregard.
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
And how much you open your mouth has anything to do with the knowledge behind it?
Please do not make personal attacks, that is against the forum rules.
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
There's actually quite a few studies now about plastic particulates in the ocean. One main thing they have found is it's working it's way up the food chain. Often times the pieces become lodged in the GI tract of animals.
As far as scientific evidence I was gathering quite a bit including tensile strength, the strength of your thumb to pinky to display even that combination of fingers can do more lbs per sq. inch than required to break the foam, also if you look into the structure of the foam it's glass-like iirc in molecular structure, which means it shatters.
I thought I had seen it all until I saw people using it in their tanks. Even a phd physicist had a good argument about the algae on the glass would probably lubricate it as you use it. Which I agree, but then I shared the information that people are using it to scrub off coralline alage. He no longer had anything to say.
As far as some people saying 'people have used it fine for years with no side effects', they can't entirely prove that given I'm sure there's some out there who have had random deaths and never thought about the foam. I'm not saying ANY random death can be attributed, but it certainly could be if they use it in the same tank.
Also for 'length of use' I've seen certain methods of carbon dosing, dosing milk and honey, different types of plenum offshoots, heck even the Triton method comes under fire though they use one of the most advanced water tests in the world. But why do they come under fire? Because they've not been running the system on a tank for more than 5, 10, even 15 years. But that's not the point.
I can prove the foam comes apart with abrasion. I can also prove corals eat particulates. Selectively choosing what they eat? That might be a possibility, but when a coral coats itself in mucous and then sucks all that mucous in, it pretty much throws that argument out the window.
All I know is from the things I've presented which create quite an intriguing hypothesis, nobody has any evidence to prove otherwise, or even the number of "this is why it wouldn't" type of arguments.
I'm not tryin to argue, it's a free country and people will do what they want. But they make solutions specifically for the hobby. I might ignore the suggestions for the magic eraser if everyone was saying "don't scrub it raw inside the tank on hard things like rock or coralline" but nobody is saying that, and the only party that suffers is the animals in our care. They also cannot speak for themselves.
username in use
Sciencing Daily
I've never seen anyone recommend them for coralline. I have only seen them recommended for film algae on glass. And there seems to be no issues with that.
whiteshark
New member
I don't see why the argument that they uptake food selectively is out the window and I don't see how you've proven they take up bits of magic eraser. Because you can prove that corals eat particulates does not prove that they take up magic eraser bits.
I'm not saying the thing doesn't break apart. I'm not saying you are trolling. I'm not even saying you're necessarily wrong because you absolutely could be correct. The problem is that you are presenting your conjecture as fact.
I don't mean to derail this thread. But I think this argument could be valid if it could be done constructively instead of the two sides sitting in their corners, crossing their arms and saying "I'm right, you're wrong.".
I'm not saying the thing doesn't break apart. I'm not saying you are trolling. I'm not even saying you're necessarily wrong because you absolutely could be correct. The problem is that you are presenting your conjecture as fact.
I don't mean to derail this thread. But I think this argument could be valid if it could be done constructively instead of the two sides sitting in their corners, crossing their arms and saying "I'm right, you're wrong.".
cakemanPA
New member
Not a personal attack. It was a comment on your non-factual posts on this subject... Over and Over and Over and Over again. Take it personally if you would like or get real facts and proof.
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
I'm open to suggestions. What sort of test would you like done whiteshark that would prove or disprove it?
As far as corals eating particulates or not, I'm not aware of anything that says they selectively feed, got any links to some research?
I am aware that people will argue that corals don't eat phytoplankton.
But at the same time they only base this off of 1 piece of research that stated they found "very little" in the gut content. You know what that proves? They ate it.
As far as corals eating particulates or not, I'm not aware of anything that says they selectively feed, got any links to some research?
I am aware that people will argue that corals don't eat phytoplankton.
But at the same time they only base this off of 1 piece of research that stated they found "very little" in the gut content. You know what that proves? They ate it.
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
You need more than tensile strength of the foam, the strength of the human hand, the hardness of the substance, the physics of abrasion? The fact you cannot put zero force behind it while using it?
Do you have any proof to say this isn't at all possible? How about some conjecture? At least that will be more constructive than just coming in here saying all my speculation is folly.
whiteshark
New member
What I'm saying is that there is too little known on the subject and more studies under reasonable experimental conditions need to be run to say one way or another. I'm not aware of much data on this topic at all. I can't disprove what you're saying. However, you can't prove what you're saying at this point either. You have a hypothesis. It's on you to prove that hypothesis true. If you could show me scientific research that proves what you're saying I will believe it.
The experiments I saw that showed the possibility of corals feeding selectively were rather unscientific so I wouldn't present them as evidence.
The experiments I saw that showed the possibility of corals feeding selectively were rather unscientific so I wouldn't present them as evidence.
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
I'll have to look more tomorrow, but I agree, there's quite a few areas of conversation that result in the same outcome since little is understood still.
I did find this in a quick search, probably read it tomorrow.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/CREWS/dbjm_23.pdf
I'll see if I can find more too. The only way we'll advance is to learn.
Though I'm afraid even with the few finds we may discover the argument could still remain that not EVERY coral feeds selectively. This is for the sake of discussion to weigh in that direction, but I fear that even if phyto isn't a main staple and is taken in with other particulates, the question remains if they can decipher the "filler" that could be ingested.
I apologize if what I'm saying comes across as fact, but given the heavily relevant subject that corals capture particulates both in their mucous and in polyps, it's hard to see a different solution to the question.
At least I can say one of the naysayers proved the point as far as fish go.. lol
I don't think he realized what he was saying and said it more as a "see nothing happened!" To that I would have to say, "This time!"
I'm reminded in times like this of previous minds of science. One of my favorite quotes is Einstein's comment about a new book being written. Backed by 100 authors it speaks of Einstein's theories and why they thought he was wrong, to which he replied, “Why 100 authors? If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!”
http://weeklysciencequiz.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-hundred-authors-against-einstein.html
I did find this in a quick search, probably read it tomorrow.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/CREWS/dbjm_23.pdf
I'll see if I can find more too. The only way we'll advance is to learn.
Though I'm afraid even with the few finds we may discover the argument could still remain that not EVERY coral feeds selectively. This is for the sake of discussion to weigh in that direction, but I fear that even if phyto isn't a main staple and is taken in with other particulates, the question remains if they can decipher the "filler" that could be ingested.
I apologize if what I'm saying comes across as fact, but given the heavily relevant subject that corals capture particulates both in their mucous and in polyps, it's hard to see a different solution to the question.
At least I can say one of the naysayers proved the point as far as fish go.. lol
I don't think he realized what he was saying and said it more as a "see nothing happened!" To that I would have to say, "This time!"
I'm reminded in times like this of previous minds of science. One of my favorite quotes is Einstein's comment about a new book being written. Backed by 100 authors it speaks of Einstein's theories and why they thought he was wrong, to which he replied, “Why 100 authors? If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!”
http://weeklysciencequiz.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-hundred-authors-against-einstein.html
Last edited:
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
Just stumbled upon this, dated 2001.
"Less well studied are the effects of ingestible debris on fish, and no studies have been conducted on filter-feeding organisms, whose feeding mechanisms do not permit them to distinguish between debris and plankton. Moreover, no studies have compared the amount of neustonic debris to that of plankton to assess the potential effects on filter feeders."
http://5gyres.org/media/Moore_2001_plastic_in_North_Pacific_Gyre.pdf
"Less well studied are the effects of ingestible debris on fish, and no studies have been conducted on filter-feeding organisms, whose feeding mechanisms do not permit them to distinguish between debris and plankton. Moreover, no studies have compared the amount of neustonic debris to that of plankton to assess the potential effects on filter feeders."
http://5gyres.org/media/Moore_2001_plastic_in_North_Pacific_Gyre.pdf
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
Ok I'm going to bed now I promise lol
Stumbled upon another semi-recent study, 2012:
Study co-author Mark Browne noted that as the small particles of fibrous plastic are ingested by marine species, the plastic particulates transferred from their stomachs to their circulation system and accumulated in their cells. While further research is needed to determine to mechanisms by which microplastics can advance through the food chain, these preliminary findings are cause for concern. According to marine ecologist Henry Carson of the University of Hawaii at Hilo, “These tiny pieces have the potential not only to get inside tissues of mussels and other animals,” he says, “but to actually move into their cells. That’s pretty frightening.”
http://eartheasy.com/blog/2012/02/study-microscopic-plastic-particles-may-be-entering-food-chain/
This was even from wikipediaI also believe a krill would qualify as a smarter animal than a coral, that's just opinion though hehe)
Marine life is severely threatened by these small pieces of plastic: the creatures that make up the base of the marine food chain, such as krill, are prematurely dying by choking on nurdles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_particle_water_pollution
A third of barnacles caught in the North Pacific gyre, a region of the ocean notoriously littered with scraps of plastic, have microfragments of the plastic material in their digestive systems at a given time, a new study finds.
At least 267 marine species have been documented eating plastic
http://news.discovery.com/animals/discovered-plastic-eating-barnacles-131023.htm
Of course they say in that last one:
Researchers aren't sure whether these particles are affecting the barnacle's health; there were no signs of digestive backup in this group, at least. The long-term effects are unknown, they wrote.
But they also said in the other that the plastic particulates are making it into the mussel's circulatory system and even inside their cells.
That's a bit alarming.
Stumbled upon another semi-recent study, 2012:
Study co-author Mark Browne noted that as the small particles of fibrous plastic are ingested by marine species, the plastic particulates transferred from their stomachs to their circulation system and accumulated in their cells. While further research is needed to determine to mechanisms by which microplastics can advance through the food chain, these preliminary findings are cause for concern. According to marine ecologist Henry Carson of the University of Hawaii at Hilo, “These tiny pieces have the potential not only to get inside tissues of mussels and other animals,” he says, “but to actually move into their cells. That’s pretty frightening.”
http://eartheasy.com/blog/2012/02/study-microscopic-plastic-particles-may-be-entering-food-chain/
This was even from wikipedia
I also believe a krill would qualify as a smarter animal than a coral, that's just opinion though hehe)Marine life is severely threatened by these small pieces of plastic: the creatures that make up the base of the marine food chain, such as krill, are prematurely dying by choking on nurdles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_particle_water_pollution
A third of barnacles caught in the North Pacific gyre, a region of the ocean notoriously littered with scraps of plastic, have microfragments of the plastic material in their digestive systems at a given time, a new study finds.
At least 267 marine species have been documented eating plastic
http://news.discovery.com/animals/discovered-plastic-eating-barnacles-131023.htm
Of course they say in that last one:
Researchers aren't sure whether these particles are affecting the barnacle's health; there were no signs of digestive backup in this group, at least. The long-term effects are unknown, they wrote.
But they also said in the other that the plastic particulates are making it into the mussel's circulatory system and even inside their cells.
That's a bit alarming.
Last edited:
letoan
New member
magic eraser
I don't use brand name magic eraser but the dollar store version for a few years and thing seem to be fine.
Why do people take thing so hard by just putting a piece of foam in the tank to clean algae off.
I feel like some people don't really take this as a hobby but as a quest to ends ocean pollution or something. It's a hobby, sit down and enjoy our box of water.
I don't use brand name magic eraser but the dollar store version for a few years and thing seem to be fine.
Why do people take thing so hard by just putting a piece of foam in the tank to clean algae off.
I feel like some people don't really take this as a hobby but as a quest to ends ocean pollution or something. It's a hobby, sit down and enjoy our box of water.
It works great on film algae on my acrylic tank. It does nothing for coralline so I use a credit card on that.
I recommend it for acrylic. I'm sure felt pads, pumps, and powerheads, fish food, our skin, dust, the dinner cooking in the other room, all add something to the water in one way or another. Fish food contains weird stuff like flour sometimes. Maybe we should ask the coral and fish if they are gluten free.
I personally think it's crazy to worry about magic eraser micro particles, when fish and coral eat sand by accident and we put superglue and epoxy and carbon dust in the water column with no concern.
Dr who is probably the only one concerned about this. It's forums like this one that spread anxiety among new reefers. I hope that people take the time to read more than a few opinions before doing anything drastic.
I recommend it for acrylic. I'm sure felt pads, pumps, and powerheads, fish food, our skin, dust, the dinner cooking in the other room, all add something to the water in one way or another. Fish food contains weird stuff like flour sometimes. Maybe we should ask the coral and fish if they are gluten free.
I personally think it's crazy to worry about magic eraser micro particles, when fish and coral eat sand by accident and we put superglue and epoxy and carbon dust in the water column with no concern.
Dr who is probably the only one concerned about this. It's forums like this one that spread anxiety among new reefers. I hope that people take the time to read more than a few opinions before doing anything drastic.
Similar threads
