marine salts

Samw · #1 03-07-2003, 04:00 AM

OK, so 2 articles now have rated marine salts and Instant Ocean which I use now wasn't rated very well in the tests.

http://www.aquacraft.net/s9910.html

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-0...ture/index.htm

So where can I get Bio-Sea salt in Vancouver?

BCOrchidGuy · #2 03-07-2003, 04:10 AM

Okay, Aquacraft the company that collected and then provided the samples for these tests is the same company that makes Bio Sea and Marine Environment. The tests are... um.. to say the least, biased...
If you use IO, keep using it, there is no arguing the fact that IO has the cleanest most modern facility of any of the salt manufacturers. I myself use Kent salt and it is IO salt with extra stuff added, it is processed and packaged by IO in their state of the art facility.

I've used Bio Sea, I've used Marine Environment, and other salts... what I didn't like about them was inconsistancies, I like my salt to mix up consistant and niether of the Aqua craft salts were consistant to any degree, I was seeing pH of almost 9 in one batch and 7.5 in another, I was also very dismayed to find Ca levels around 200ppt, and alk levels around 4 dKH.

The kent salt has been very good to me, but if you use IO now, and are happy with it, keep using it.

Don't change salts because MDP says his are better, change salts if you don't like yours... btw, IO is one of the most commonly used salt, if it really isn't that good, why do people use it?

Samw · #3 03-07-2003, 04:21 AM

Thanks for sharing your experience. From what I read, testing was not done nor paid for by Aquacraft. I think Aquacraft published the data on their website because their brand came in 1st place. My animals might not be dying but if there are better salts out there, I would be willing to try it. It does seem to make sense that (all else equal) the better salt would have less metals in it and with concentrations closer to natural sea water.

QUOTE-"The S-15 Report™ was prepared by Anresco Laboratories, an independent third party laboratory. The majority of testing was performed by the University of Missouri, a US Government prime contract testing laboratory, Environmental Trace Substances Research Center, Dept. of Environmental Science & Technology."

http://www.aquacraft.net/s9911.html

QUOTE-"The S-15™ Report™ is the first and only independent comparative assay of 15 different brands of artificial or synthetic sea salts. It was commissioned and paid for by Global Scientific Publications. GSP is not in any way affiliated with any manufacturer of sea salts. Nor, is any manufacturer of synthetic sea salts associated with Global Scientific Publications."

Did you get your Bio-Sea locally or did you have to mail order that? Thanks.

.

Samw · #4 03-07-2003, 05:08 AM

Interestingly, the S15 report was reviewed by someone from the Calgary Aquarium Society.

http://www.calgaryaquariumsociety.co..._Aquarist.html

EmilyB · #5 03-07-2003, 06:26 AM

I really hope no one buys into the latest ad

....we all know there has been some collaboration for a long time here....with a certain person and Marc Weiss...

Take care....

EmilyB · #6 03-07-2003, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samw

Interestingly, the S15 report was reviewed by someone from the Calgary Aquarium Society.

http://www.calgaryaquariumsociety.co..._Aquarist.html

That's really funny, since it is dated 2000, the Calgary Aquarium Society is strictly FW, that is what I understand in 2003.

Samw · #7 03-07-2003, 06:53 AM

Deb, The author of that review didn't own a marine aquarium at that time. Note his last paragraph

"I would certainly now want to try Marine Environment (which is available locally) if I ever get back into marines."

However, looking at the objectives of the Aquarium Society, they don't exclude marine aquarists from joining do they?

http://www.calgaryaquariumsociety.co...bjectives.html

They even have 1 article in the article section on marines.

Well, ok, it looks like the emphasis of the club is freshwater and marine aquarists would not benefit from the club at the moment.

Regarding the salt mixes, let's forget the conclusions made in the RK article about toxins. Do you think the salt composition figures are accurate in both reports? If so, I would like to try the salt mix that is closest to natural sea water.

Van down by the river · #8 03-07-2003, 07:01 AM

This report came under heavy fire when it first came out, not to mention it seemed to coincide with the company marketing campaign. Many bandwagoned saw no difference, and went back to their old salt.

They claim it as a Scientific report yet, their sampling methods would not make for a fair scientific report.

Not to mention alot of what improves their salt was the bottle of additives that came in each bag. Take away the "magic bottle" and their soapbox doesn't look so lofty anymore.

One more thing, their salt was usually around $10 dollars more than Kent and Instant Ocean. With the saving you could buy what ever additives you like!

My two bits...

sumpfinfishe · #9 03-07-2003, 10:14 AM

Well that last article on R/K did put a little fear in the back of my mind, and Sam I do share your concerns :?

I have been using IO for the last five and a half years now in a 27gl system.
If there was problems to arise from this salt mix, I think a reefer/keeper with a smaller system such as mine would notice any harmful effects.

To tell you the truth, over the last 66 months I have only had two noticeable changes within my reef when it came to salt mixes. Both of these changes were not positive, as I witnessed stressed fish and poor polyp or tissue expansion. After switching back to IO for both of the following months, I saw positive changes occur in both cases.

"I believe" that IO is the best mix on the market right now, as I have seen the results with my own eyes and not by just some samples and numbers. There is however always room for improvement, so "I believe" that if there are mixes on the market that don't provide what our systems require-then I'm sure new blends or improvements will be introduced in the future.

And last "I believe" that we cannot jump on any bandwagon too early! Until there is substantial, firm evidence that certain mixes are harmful to our tanks, then do or use what works best for your reef or fish setup-that's my belief and I'm stick'n to it!

BCOrchidGuy · #10 03-07-2003, 02:24 PM

Sam I understand your concerns and thoughts, really I do. Aquacraft did pay for the tests to be done, they did not do the tests themselves, They DID mix some of the samples with water before they shipped them and they did do the packaging.

The worst salts I have used have been bio sea and Marine Environment, the pH alk and Ca swings made it VERY difficult to do water changes.

IO may not be the best salt out there, but it is a good salt, if you want to try Bio Sea, king Ed pets sells it by the 50 gallon bag, they also have marine environment. I've tried both and would rather pay the extra and get my Kent salt, thats what I have had the best experience with.

I like simplicity, I add 4 cups of Kent salt to my 10 gallon make up tank, I run a power head for 24 hours and keep the water heated. When I test it it has a pH of 8.2-8.3 a Ca level of 440-460 and an Alk level of 11dKH, always, I've been through 2 200 gallon buckets now. Don't forget Kent is IO salt with extra Ca and trace elements added so if the kent salt is that stable IO is probably too.

Just for a thought, I'm willing to bet aquacraft didn't just take a random sampling of salts, I bet they looked for discrepancies in the salts before they packaged them up, OBVISOUSLY I can't prove that, but I have my suspicions, I just figured they must have had a lot of salt laying around .. what did they do with it all?