Saltwater Ick, Parasite Problem Solution For Ever...

[wfd1008]

i think i have to agree with rudedog40 on this. from everything i understand about ich, all fish have it, just like all humans have MRSA on them. the reason there's an outbreak of symptoms is because of the immune system is weak due to stress or some other factor. i've always lived with the notion that you never really get rid of ich, just the symptoms.

 

[al mc]

wfd....Only problem with the analogy is that MRSA is a bacteria that can live off humans as well as on them. Ich is parasitic so if you remove the host from the parasites environment it will not survive beyond the point where it needs its host. I think (don't want to speak for you rudedog or 1journey..but I will) that they agree that you can break the life cycle of ICH if you remove the fish host for a period of time. The length of this time may be debateable. Not true of MRSA.
While all fish may have Ich. I believe it can be eliminated, not just controlled,
if you are willing to take the time, effort and money to do so. It is ok for those who want to treat the symptoms. That is their choice.
I may not have eliminated ICH from my display tanks, but I hope I have. I also may not be able to guarantee that I won't bring it back into one of my DTs with the addition of new fish, coral/inverts or rock. But my best chance of not reintroducing it is proper quarantine procedures.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Ok, I'm glad you posted that. I think I see where some of the confusion is.
Ich has a multi-stage life cycle. A tank that is "fallow" for 6 weeks breaks the life cycle of the parasite. They only live a couple of weeks. By removing the host you basically are eliminating "habitat" for a particular portion of the life cycle. The cysts continue to hatch, but die off without maturing to lay more eggs.
If you QT live rock for 3 weeks (I believe I actually posted I prefer 4 weeks for rock and inverts on the thread you are mentioning, but I may have said that on a different thread) then even if the rock is covered with free swimming ich and cysts you have removed the part of the life cycle they need to successfully reproduce. When you QT inverts and rock you are not killing the ich, you are breaking it's life cycle and allowing it to die off naturally.
I'm using the 3 week timeframe because every thread I've ever read about QTing something uses a standard of 3 weeks. However, I then don't understand the 6 week empty tank scenario. You say the Ich parasite only lives a couple of weeks. If they die off in that timeframe, why keep the tank empty for 6 weeks? The two times seem contradictory. Why is it that it takes 6 weeks of a fishless tank to make sure a system infested with ich is 'ich free', yet you only have to QT something 3 or 4 weeks to break it's life cycle? The two times don't make sense. What's the difference between 'killing ich' and 'breaking their life cycle'? What do you do with a new fish? You say you QT them for 3 weeks. Do you do hypo during that timeframe? If not, what if the fish has this 'hidden' ich you don't see, and never exhibits any external symptoms during the 3 week QT period? You end up putting a fish with ich in your tank anyway.
And I haven't seen an answer to my question regarding the testing of ich being present in a system. I still say there's no 100% proof leaving a tank empty for 6 weeks kills any and all ich that's present in a previously infected tank. Every system is different. You yourself have discussed certain strains of Ich that are 'hypo resistant', and you want to do copper treatments. What's to say there isn't a strain of ich that can live 8 weeks without a host? How many different tanks and systems did these experts test to confirm the 6 week life cycle of ich? The bottom line is you can't be 100% sure ich is completely out of any system. That's why keeping your fish healthy and stress free helps keep ich outbreaks from occurring. You, sep, Beth, and the other 'hypo believers' have had tanks that are well established, and you probably don't put many new things into them. So keeping your tanks balanced, and your critters happy, you'll probably never see ich again.

 

[wfd1008]

Originally Posted by Al Mc
wfd....Only problem with the analogy is that MRSA is a bacteria that can live off humans as well as on them. Ich is parasitic so if you remove the host from the parasites environment it will not survive beyond the point where it needs its host. I think (don't want to speak for you rudedog or 1journey..but I will) that they agree that you can break the life cycle of ICH if you remove the fish host for a period of time. The length of this time may be debateable. Not true of MRSA.
While all fish may have Ich. I believe it can be eliminated, not just controlled,
if you are willing to take the time, effort and money to do so. It is ok for those who want to treat the symptoms. That is their choice.
I may not have eliminated ICH from my display tanks, but I hope I have. I also may not be able to guarantee that I won't bring it back into one of my DTs with the addition of new fish, coral/inverts or rock. But my best chance of not reintroducing it is proper quarantine procedures.
yea, but they both are still there. al mc, i sent you a pm about one of your earlier questions.

 

[wfd1008]

That's why keeping your fish healthy and stress free helps keep ich outbreaks from occurring.
i think this is the best thing to do. good advice rudedog.

 

[al mc]

wfd..Until I have a test that can reliably pick up Ich DNA in my tank I can't prove or disprove your statement about Ich still being in my tank. I can't prove a negative at this point in time with the science as we know it. But likewise, it can't be catagorically stated that my DTs have Ich by someone else either.
The point I feel that I have tried to make is that what everyone wants is the healthiest tank they can get. We can all agree that keeping water parameters good, feeding appropriately and trying to keep stress to a minimum will keep our fish and inverts as healthy as possible.
If a disease is identified as being obvious in my tanks I will try to treat the symptoms and eliminate the disease...if possible. Others will treat the symptoms and be happy when they go away and accept that is the either all they want or the best they can do. No problem, no hassle..just different approaches.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by wfd1008
i think i have to agree with rudedog40 on this. from everything i understand about ich, all fish have it, just like all humans have MRSA on them. the reason there's an outbreak of symptoms is because of the immune system is weak due to stress or some other factor. i've always lived with the notion that you never really get rid of ich, just the symptoms.
Marine Ich is a parasite. Can you list any documentation or study anywhere that disputes this?

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
I'm using the 3 week timeframe because every thread I've ever read about QTing something uses a standard of 3 weeks. However, I then don't understand the 6 week empty tank scenario. You say the Ich parasite only lives a couple of weeks. If they die off in that timeframe, why keep the tank empty for 6 weeks? The two times seem contradictory. Why is it that it takes 6 weeks of a fishless tank to make sure a system infested with ich is 'ich free', yet you only have to QT something 3 or 4 weeks to break it's life cycle? The two times don't make sense. What's the difference between 'killing ich' and 'breaking their life cycle'? What do you do with a new fish? You say you QT them for 3 weeks. Do you do hypo during that timeframe? If not, what if the fish has this 'hidden' ich you don't see, and never exhibits any external symptoms during the 3 week QT period? You end up putting a fish with ich in your tank anyway.
And I haven't seen an answer to my question regarding the testing of ich being present in a system. I still say there's no 100% proof leaving a tank empty for 6 weeks kills any and all ich that's present in a previously infected tank. Every system is different. You yourself have discussed certain strains of Ich that are 'hypo resistant', and you want to do copper treatments. What's to say there isn't a strain of ich that can live 8 weeks without a host? How many different tanks and systems did these experts test to confirm the 6 week life cycle of ich? The bottom line is you can't be 100% sure ich is completely out of any system. That's why keeping your fish healthy and stress free helps keep ich outbreaks from occurring. You, sep, Beth, and the other 'hypo believers' have had tanks that are well established, and you probably don't put many new things into them. So keeping your tanks balanced, and your critters happy, you'll probably never see ich again.
We routinely say to keep a tank fallow for 6 weeks to be on the safe side. As with many single celled organisms variations in things like temp can speed up or slow down the life cycle a few days.
The difference in killing and letting it die out is simple. Think of it as catching a mouse in a live trap. You could shoot and kill it, or you could throw the trap away and let it die out of starvation. Same with Ich. You can try to target the individual cells, or just let it die out by removing it's host.
Again you have misquoted me multiple times. I never said I QT fish for 3 weeks. I QT everything for a month. I said there is apparently a rare subspecies of ich that has been identified that is more resistent to Hypo. And I never said I want to do copper. I said copper has it's uses. That's why even commercial aquariums treat with it.
There may very well be a subspecies of Ich out there capable of living for months without a host. Until that's an issue, however, I'm gonna stick with what has worked in thousands of tanks to completely eradicate the parasite.
The bottom line is Ich is a parasite that must be introduced to our systems.
I agree that we want to keep fish healthy and stress free. The best way to do that, btw, is to QT all of them to allow them time to adjust to captivity, feeding, tank specs, etc.
I moved my 210 from my office into a 180 at my house. Included in that move was over 200Lbs of live rock and 700Lbs of sand. I think it's safe to say I stressed my tank more than most. Thankfully, because my tank is Ich free, I didn't have to worry about an outbreak.
You keep saying there is no way to "prove" a tank is Ich free. Let me ask you; Have you studied the life cycle of marine ich? Have you published a peer reviewed article journaling the life cycle of this parasite? Rudedog, you're arguing as though we here are arbitrarily making up info about this parasite. We're not. As I've said over and over, the life cycle has been studied for 50+ years. Feel free to continue to say whatever you think is true about the Ich parasite. Understand, however, that many aquarists here are going to dispute your opinions with facts based on scientific studies.

 

[moonie]

will a uv sterlizer unit help kill or keep ick under control?? I haveread reports that it will

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by moonie
will a uv sterlizer unit help kill or keep ick under control?? I haveread reports that it will
A UV works by killing everything that goes through it. So, in theory, it would help. If it is set up properly, and if your tank has sufficient current to make sure everything is going through the UV.
Of course UV's on reef tanks are not a good idea in my opinion. And you need a QT tank anyway so to me a UV is an unneccessary cost.

 

[pipo]

there is never an unnecesary cost when it comes to your fish health and life. of course the UV light helps and yes the water has to go in the UV filter, when it comes to your fish health everything counts, thats why this is a hobby because when you get in it you take the commitment to take care of your fish what ever the cost.
Now talking about something else and getting back to the original statement of the Thread, what I wrote in the beginning is something I tried, and it worked one time, the next time and many other times with friends, because since the first time you use it the ich is gone, unless you add new fish, rock or inverts with ich, and yes people is right if someone does a hipo treatment or a Cu Treatment the ich disappears to the eye but it is still in the tank while the inmune system of your fish is good its not going to reappear once your fish gets stressed then the ich comes back, and there is no test that will tell you there is ich in your tank or not the only way is to test your water in a lab.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by PIPO
there is never an unnecesary cost when it comes to your fish health and life. of course the UV light helps and yes the water has to go in the UV filter, when it comes to your fish health everything counts, thats why this is a hobby because when you get in it you take the commitment to take care of your fish what ever the cost.
Now talking about something else and getting back to the original statement of the Thread, what I wrote in the beginning is something I tried, and it worked one time, the next time and many other times with friends, because since the first time you use it the ich is gone, unless you add new fish, rock or inverts with ich, and yes people is right if someone does a hipo treatment or a Cu Treatment the ich disappears to the eye but it is still in the tank while the inmune system of your fish is good its not going to reappear once your fish gets stressed then the ich comes back, and there is no test that will tell you there is ich in your tank or not the only way is to test your water in a lab.
A UV is an unneccessary cost, imho, because you can prevent the same issues by practicing proper QT techniques. Why run UV to kill parasites that shouldn't be getting in your tank to begin with?
Your treatment method has been used for years. People using Metronidazole have reported mixed results when treating for Ich. Cu and hypo have much better success rates. According to Fenner it is "Not effective consistently".
I am 100% against ever medicating your display tank. So Cu and Hypo are the best options imho. Using an antibiodic in a display tank is just to risky to me. I appreciate that it seems to have worked in your tank and your friends tanks. That said, by your own admission you cannot be sure the Ich is gone. Using a QT tank in conjunction with Cu or Hypo properly virtually guarantees success.

 

[sepulatian]

Originally Posted by PIPO
there is never an unnecesary cost when it comes to your fish health and life. of course the UV light helps and yes the water has to go in the UV filter, when it comes to your fish health everything counts, thats why this is a hobby because when you get in it you take the commitment to take care of your fish what ever the cost.
Now talking about something else and getting back to the original statement of the Thread, what I wrote in the beginning is something I tried, and it worked one time, the next time and many other times with friends, because since the first time you use it the ich is gone, unless you add new fish, rock or inverts with ich, and yes people is right if someone does a hipo treatment or a Cu Treatment the ich disappears to the eye but it is still in the tank while the inmune system of your fish is good its not going to reappear once your fish gets stressed then the ich comes back, and there is no test that will tell you there is ich in your tank or not the only way is to test your water in a lab.
PIPO, no one disputes that a UV is beneficial in a qt tank. It is not recommended for a reef though because you will be killing the beneficial microrganizms in the tank as well. UV's are unnecessary to a certain extent because you can accomplish the same result by properly quarantining your fish as 1journeyman stated. If people want to add a UV to the qt it will certainly not harm anything.
As for your next statement, you said that this treatment worked the first, next, and many other times with friends. Why are you needing to treat the fish so many times? I assume that some of these times were on the same tanks. Wouldn't it be easier to quarantine the rocks, fish, and inverts and not have to repeatedly treat the tank? You also say that after hypo and/or CU treatment the ich is still in the tank then at the end of that statement you say that there is no way to tell that ich is out of the tank unless you take the water to a lab. That is a complete contradiction. If a person cannot tell if ich is remaining in their system then how can you state that ich definately IS still in the system? People keep asking for proof that our systems are ich free. We cannot give a complete lab report on our tanks, but 1journeyman just gave you a pretty good example that our fish do indeed get stressed with him moving his tank. I have had the electricity go off for a period of time due to a storm making the temp drop, oxygen level drop, etc. I have moved my tank, which includes catching the fish, taking the rocks and water out, therefore stirring everything up. There are circumstances when our fish get stressed to the point that their immune systems have been lowered. If there were parasites in our system they would certainly have attatched. Maintining a quarantine tank is very little trouble at all and properly quarantining all new purchases reduces stress on your fish and on you.

 

[al mc]

Originally Posted by sepulatian
If a person cannot tell if ich is remaining in their system then how can you state that ich definately IS still in the system? People keep asking for proof that our systems are ich free. We cannot give a complete lab report on our tanks .

You can't prove a negative

. Until there is a DNA test for Ich no one can tell for sure. We can only do our best to eliminate (cure) the problem with proper use of fallow tanks, if needed, and QTing everything versus treating the symptoms.

 

[wfd1008]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Marine Ich is a parasite. Can you list any documentation or study anywhere that disputes this?
did i say that ich was not a parasite? NO. i guess you also think that i said that people have gills and dorsal fins also. i was just making a point that all fish have ich and that's all. don't try to over read things. E.A.D.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by wfd1008
did i say that ich was not a parasite? NO. i guess you also think that i said that people have gills and dorsal fins also. i was just making a point that all fish have ich and that's all. don't try to over read things. E.A.D.
Your post compared Ich to MSRA. I was pointing out you're comparing a parasite to a bacteria.
And I am making the point that all fish do not have ich because it is a parasite... Do all children have head lice? Do all indoor cats have ticks?
The "all fish have ich" mantra is purely false. I challenge anyone to link a single scientific study stating all aquarium fish have ich.

 

[pipo]

Hi, what I said is that I only used the met. treatment once in my DT, the following times I've used it in friends tanks, and yes you are right the use of uv light might be a problem when having corals, what I said is it is not a unnecesary cost because in this hobby you can always use a little help and you are right the use in a QT tank might be the best answer to this light, and an answer to the other guy who said the best way to keep ich out of our DT is to have a QT tank, I never said it wasnt, you can even go back and read my thread and will see I always recomend the QT tank like every other person in this forum.

 

[saltn00b]

i of course agree with all the SWF mods here but i just have to point out to journeyman that anything can be a parasite, bacteria to fish. carry on

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by saltn00b
i of course agree with all the SWF mods here but i just have to point out to journeyman that anything can be a parasite, bacteria to fish. carry on
Shhhh....
We're having enough trouble without further muddying the water with different definitions of "parasite".
Thanks for the vote of confidence. You've been around long enough to know though that as Mods we're always promoting the need to keep learning in this hobby. None of us belief we are always right. I probably most of all.
This whole Ich topic always frustrates me to no end. I've searched for any documentation or study suggesting all fish have Ich. The only place i've ever seen that suggested is on forums like ours here when someone says something like "all fish have ich". I would kill to know where that theory originated. Was there an early fish manual that stated this?
Go down the list of the current "gurus" of our hobby; Calfo, Fenner, Pro, etc. They will disagree to some extent on treatment, but none will say their tanks have Ich in them. And yet somehow the phrase "all fish have ich" has a life of it's own.
I'm serious... If anyone has any published, peer reviewed evidence of ich being present in all aquariums pleeeeaaaasssse post it. I WANT to know where this theory is coming from. I WANT to learn more about it.
I have no problem admitting I'm wrong. That said, simply saying "all fish have ich", in direct contradiction to a mountain of science, is not going to cut it.

 

[fishrich]

I have heard that hyposalinity research is being done that in the future we may have to go to a lower salinity level than 1.009 to kill ich. Anyone else hear that?