KWYjibo, please post this asa separate thread. But yes, it does look like its in trouble.
Quick update...I have recieved a classic sick elegance from Dan that arrived in perfect condition...have photos and will send them to the webiste in a week
Kevin - thanks so much. Please hang on to them until I return fromthe keys this week or fix them if they will not make it according to insutrcutions.
Mae, please keep me posted, and thanks!
We also hve the support of another French reefkeeping group who are in the process of translating this projhect for their site.
Update on sick corals: All to date, with the exception of Dan's, have been fixed as they continued a decline in the system. Both healthy specimens are still doing fine and I suspect theyw il continue to do so. I will acquire another healthy coral and try som transfection experiments.
Also, upon arrival, Dan's corals had a pronounced brownish white adhesive web on its surface which I aspirated and examined microscopically. It appeared to me largely congealed mucus and a host of mcirobes including ciliates and spirochaetes - similar to the consotrium in brown jelly infections. There were also some annelids present. I will look at any bacterial flora later next week and perhaps send in some material for sequencing analysis to see if this material has an unusual bacterial compostion. the microbes present do not appear to be causative, similar to brown jelly, and were present at much reduced numbers by comparison with the necrotic tissue in brown jelly infections.
Four sick corals are completely decalcified and ready to be sent in to the histology lab for processing, and even Jeanne's coral has a lot of tissue to be analyzed, but its poor condition may not be useful by comparison with the others..We'll see.
Mary, I hope our private emails have clarified things, but long and short of it is I handle things the way I handle them, for better or worse. It's how I work, and always has been. I think a lot of you, and it would take a lot for me to say anything bad about you. But, please don't warn me how to post in my forum. Thanks.
Dr. Mac wrote to John Link, to request his name be removed from the thread. Dr. Mac seems notably upset that his name was portrayed in a negative light. John initially denied that request, but later made an edit. I am allowing it for present and I have just sent Dr. Mac responses to emails he sent to me a few days ago and I'll see how he responds. His claim was that the information I mentioned regarding his response to the volunteer was different than if I had contacted him myself. I'm not sure why this would be the case, as I clearly requested support in this thread by members to locate elegance corals...sick or healthy, nor am I sure why someone would respond differently to one person than another...well, I do understand why, but don't think it a very nice thing to do in any case. I think people should be treated equally regardless of their influence in the hobby or their sponsorship.
Part of my response, and something that I hope clarifies my position, if posted below:
>>A long time ago, when I was writing heavily for the printed mags, and Aquarium Frontiers was doing product reviews, I suggested that FAMA, TFH and Aquarium Fish do the same, and I offered to write unbiased product reviews and even do tests and comparisons for them. I commented how every other industry did this....car mags reviewed cars, computer mags reviewed softwater and hardware, cooking magazines reviewed cookware, blah blah blah. I noted how the aquarium magazines, except Aquarium Frontiers, never did that, and there was a great interest by the hobby and it would also be very valuable. Almost in unison, all three editors quickly responded, "OH NO! We could never do that. The aquarium trade is too small and we could never risk upsetting or losing our sponsors."
I said, "What??!! Well that's crazy. Sometimes Car and Driver likes a Ford model and sometimes they hate another Ford model - sometimes one gets high marks and another one doesn't. But, every month, Ford has numerous ads in every car magazine. If anything, it alerts them for free as to consumer needs, likes, dislikes and may even spur them to make a better product. Sure, it might affect sales on that model, but ultimately, there's no denying if something is good or bad, and people have a right to know and be informed. That's how it works everywhere...that's why so many Consumer Reports type groups exist. That's why there are "customer reviews" as well as unbiased tests." The magazines again said, "Thanks, but no way we would ever do something like that. We can't afford to lose the sponsors."
I was stunned. Dumbfounded. Unbiased or comparative tests of products could not be published in the aquarium trade. Hobbyists could not be informed of the pluses or minuses of vendors or products - it was an intentional cloaking in the name of money in a huge industry. Wow.
Every night, people critique others on public television. More than anyone, and less likely to be generally ok to do, people openly criticize the president of the United States. They make judgements on Enron, Michael Jackson, the cigarette industry, etc. Opinions, so long as they are not libelous or slanderous, are not only accepted, but are our right. Facts, even if they portray someone in a negative light, are also legal and are not slanderous or libelous.
Ever watch Late Night with Bill Maher? Very good show. Very popular show. Attracts lots of sponsorship. He even got fired for his remarks on terrorism, but was then rehired because he had done nothing wrong. Ever read the customer reviews of every single book, CD, or product sold on Amazon.com? Many are pretty graphic and usually unjustified. Still, Amazon puts them there so others can be informed as to the product or service they are buying. In fact, one of the biggest complaints people have about this country is the unfair and illegal influence special interest groups have when they contribute to a political party. Because someone contributes money does not allow them to influence the actions or goals of the group. If no contract exists that stipulates, "If I give you money, you do this for me" then it is illegal to try and influence action based on sponsorship or contribution.
I don't know why the aquarium trade feels like they don't apply to all this. But, part of the results of this type of cloak and dagger business is in large part a reason for the problems in the industry and the pressures by conservation and legislative groups who fail to be able to get accurate information about the trade in order to ensure that proper legislation allows or limits its operations.
<<
OK, guys, I'm off to the Keys for a week. Keep up the great work, and I look forward to responding to all of you and seeing what has been accomplished by all of you in my absence.
