salt

[Carolyn]

I keep reading about salt being added to ponds, but what kind? Is pickling
salt the same as alum?

[Jim Humphries]

It is plain NaCl salt but without the additives used to keep table salt from
clumping. Sea salt or Kosher salt, or someone else may suggest some cheaper
kind, just no additives.

--
Jim and Sara Humphries, Victoria, BC
"Carolyn" > wrote in message
...
>I keep reading about salt being added to ponds, but what kind? Is pickling
> salt the same as alum?
>
>

[[email protected]]

it should have no additives.
solar salt is not the same thing as sea salt and sea salt is not recommended for gf
and koi. get the stuff comes in plastic bags for water softeners. make sure it is
crystal, not pellets. it is really cheap for a big bag.
Ingrid

"Carolyn" > wrote:

>I keep reading about salt being added to ponds, but what kind? Is pickling
>salt the same as alum?
>



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Claudia]

So should ALL ponds, ALL zones, add salt? Or does it depend on filter
media, fish/no fish, plants, liner or ?????? What are the desirable
quantities, per 100 gals?

--
Totus Tuus
Claudia (take out no spam to reply)
"Hal" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 08:55:00 -0400, "Carolyn" > wrote:
>
> >I keep reading about salt being added to ponds, but what kind? Is
pickling
> >salt the same as alum?
> >
> Solar salt crystals used in water softeners is the best bargain.
> (Found in the water softener department.) Almost pure salt and about
> $4 for a 40lb bag at Lowe's. Add .888 pounds of salt per hundred
> gallons of pond water for a .1% solution.
>
> Alum is aluminum sulfate, sometimes used to kill algae or make soil
> acid. Not for the same purpose.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hal

[[email protected]]

no. you start by checking the level of salt in your tap water. coastal areas and
others often have pretty high levels of salt in their water and dont need to add any
more. 0.05% is common naturally occurring levels and that is what is fine for winter
level of salt. in spring people bring their salt up to 0.1% and then let it drop
thru water changes. those with significant salt need to check their salt levels if
there is evaporation and topping up going on. the salt level can creep due to
evaporation.
levels of 0.05% dont harm most plants. liner doesnt matter, fish type doesnt matter.

Ingrid

"Claudia" > wrote:

>So should ALL ponds, ALL zones, add salt? Or does it depend on filter
>media, fish/no fish, plants, liner or ?????? What are the desirable
>quantities, per 100 gals?



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[RichToyBox]

Salt is one of those things that gets fights going. Some say no salt,
except when you need it, since the parasites might become immune to the low
salt levels and then it takes a lot more salt to kill parasites. This has
happened with at least one parasite, since the Japanese maintain heavy salt
levels to keep down the parasites, some have mutated. Others say run 0.1%
year round, stimulates slime coat, eases osmoregulation (the ability of the
fish to maintain the correct water level), and it doesn't hurt plants at
that level. I usually maintain 0.1%, mostly because SO won't let me let it
go to 0.0.
--
RichToyBox
http://www.geocities.com/richtoybox/index.html

"Claudia" > wrote in message
news:0fR%c.8380$vI2.5932@trnddc02...
> So should ALL ponds, ALL zones, add salt? Or does it depend on filter
> media, fish/no fish, plants, liner or ?????? What are the desirable
> quantities, per 100 gals?
>
> --
> Totus Tuus
> Claudia (take out no spam to reply)
> "Hal" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 08:55:00 -0400, "Carolyn" > wrote:
> >
> > >I keep reading about salt being added to ponds, but what kind? Is
> pickling
> > >salt the same as alum?
> > >
> > Solar salt crystals used in water softeners is the best bargain.
> > (Found in the water softener department.) Almost pure salt and about
> > $4 for a 40lb bag at Lowe's. Add .888 pounds of salt per hundred
> > gallons of pond water for a .1% solution.
> >
> > Alum is aluminum sulfate, sometimes used to kill algae or make soil
> > acid. Not for the same purpose.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Hal
>
>

[Tom L. La Bron]

That's right RichToyBox! One of the newest, worst
parasites to have become immune to salt is Costia.
Since it is so small it usually has a good foot hold in
the pond and one the fish before the pond keeper
realizes that the fish are sick. It used to be that a
0.1% was enough to kill it, but the mutated variety
needs 0.6% or higher to do it in.

I am one of the nay sayers for constant salt addition.
If you use it as a remedy it is great, but just as
some costia are immune to low levels now there are
probably others.

Leave the salt for your French fries and corn on the
cob and leave it out of you pond. It encourages the
slime coat because salt is an irritate to the fish, so
it is building a barrier against. The crap about the
regulation of osmosis is smoke and mirrors. The fish
does that all by it self, that is part of life for the
fish.

There are three things to keeping your fish health, and
they are 1. Clean water, 2. Clear Water and last but
not least 3. Clean water. Concentrate on keeping your
fish's environment pristine clean and the rest will
take care of itself.

Tom L.L.
---------------------------------
RichToyBox wrote:
> Salt is one of those things that gets fights going. Some say no salt,
> except when you need it, since the parasites might become immune to the low
> salt levels and then it takes a lot more salt to kill parasites. This has
> happened with at least one parasite, since the Japanese maintain heavy salt
> levels to keep down the parasites, some have mutated. Others say run 0.1%
> year round, stimulates slime coat, eases osmoregulation (the ability of the
> fish to maintain the correct water level), and it doesn't hurt plants at
> that level. I usually maintain 0.1%, mostly because SO won't let me let it
> go to 0.0.

[Happy'Cam'per]

"Tom L. La Bron" > wrote in message
...
> That's right RichToyBox! One of the newest, worst
> parasites to have become immune to salt is Costia.
> Since it is so small it usually has a good foot hold in
> the pond and one the fish before the pond keeper
> realizes that the fish are sick. It used to be that a
> 0.1% was enough to kill it, but the mutated variety
> needs 0.6% or higher to do it in.
>
> I am one of the nay sayers for constant salt addition.
> If you use it as a remedy it is great, but just as
> some costia are immune to low levels now there are
> probably others.
>
> Leave the salt for your French fries and corn on the
> cob and leave it out of you pond. It encourages the
> slime coat because salt is an irritate to the fish, so
> it is building a barrier against. The crap about the
> regulation of osmosis is smoke and mirrors. The fish
> does that all by it self, that is part of life for the
> fish.
>
> There are three things to keeping your fish health, and
> they are 1. Clean water, 2. Clear Water and last but
> not least 3. Clean water. Concentrate on keeping your
> fish's environment pristine clean and the rest will
> take care of itself.
>
> Tom L.L.
> ---------------------------------

Not sure I completely agree with all you're saying but:
I agree with the slime coat thing, but the osmotic thing is debatable, if
done gradually then I suppose no problem, but if you took a fish out of your
pond and dipped it straight into RO water then there would be osmotic issues
surely?
Tom, you say the best bet is to have clean pristine water, Agreed, and the
best way to do that would be to look after your water plants, if the plants
are happy the fish and water will be ecstatic :) Agreed?
--
**So long, and thanks for all the fish!**

[Derek Broughton]

> "Tom L. La Bron" > wrote in message
> ...

>> Leave the salt for your French fries and corn on the
>> cob and leave it out of you pond. It encourages the
>> slime coat because salt is an irritate to the fish, so

Absolutely.

>> it is building a barrier against. The crap about the
>> regulation of osmosis is smoke and mirrors. The fish
>> does that all by it self, that is part of life for the
>> fish.

Yeah, and breathing is part of life for us. People manage to live at
altitudes of 15,000 feet, but they have to expend a lot of energy just
breathing. Bring them down to sea level and they win long distance races
easily. With fish it's the same. Much energy is exerted just to maintain
osmotic regulation. Add a little salt and that leaves more resources for
fighting disease.

That said, I'm still not sure I believe in the addition of salt - because
I'm unconvinced the benefits outweigh the costs.
--
derek

[[email protected]]

what costs? Ingrid

Derek Broughton > wrote:
because
>I'm unconvinced the benefits outweigh the costs.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Derek Broughton]

Tom L. La Bron wrote:

> There are three things to keeping your fish health, and
> they are 1. Clean water, 2. Clear Water and last but
> not least 3. Clean water. Concentrate on keeping your
> fish's environment pristine clean and the rest will
> take care of itself.

I didn't even notice this the first time through. I believe there's a typo
in (2), Tom . Clean water is good, but clear water is for Koi nuts :-)
--
derek

[Derek Broughton]

wrote:

> what costs? Ingrid
>
> Derek Broughton > wrote:
> because
>>I'm unconvinced the benefits outweigh the costs.

That certainly seems to have been adequately discussed. Salt may be
responsible for creating superbugs. Salt is definitely an irritant to
fish. Salt is generally not good for plants.

You can argue that at these levels none of these things are a problem. I
don't even know whether or not that would be true, or if anyone can prove
it, but that's not the problem. I lost count of the number of people who
have posted here because they've screwed up the amount of salt.

In the 30+ years I've been keeping fish, salt has _always_ been touted as a
panacea. It's certainly good as part of a treatment for sick fish, but I
remain unconvinced that _anything_ unnatural should be used for 24/7
treatment of problems that don't exist, whether it be prophylactic use of
salt in fish or antibiotics in livestock. As Tom (with whom I've probably
disagreed more than most people here) said, the priority is _clean_ water.
If you take care of that, the rest pretty well takes care of itself.
--
derek

[~ jan JJsPond.us]

>clear water is for Koi nuts :-)

Who you calling nuts, big boy? Those are fighting words! Now koi kichi I
can live with. ;o) ~ jan


~Power to the Porg, Flow On!~

[Derek Broughton]

~ jan JJsPond.us wrote:

>>clear water is for Koi nuts :-)
>
> Who you calling nuts, big boy? Those are fighting words! Now koi kichi I
> can live with. ;o) ~ jan

oops, sorry. It was just a poor translation :-)

Seriously, though, after the first time my koi disappeared at the bottom of
the pond when the heron came, I was quite happy that the water was green
enough that you could only see them to a depth of two feet.
--
derek

[[email protected]]

salt doesnt "create" super bugs. it is not mutagenic.
an increase in salt resistant parasites may arise by natural selection when using
salt. that is, salt will kill off those parasites lacking the genetics to withstand
salt leaving the resistant ones to reproduce and populate the fish.
almost all fish breeders use salt OR the water they raise their fish in is naturally
salty.
fish that come out of most ponds are carriers of a few of each of the common kinds of
parasites (the reason we quarantine)
fish raised in salted water carry parasites that are salt resistant.
people dont know if their fish are carriers of salt resistant parasites in any case
so using salt to treat parasites may be pointless.
similarly, there is absolutely no evidence that the salt resistant parasites on fish
"revert" to salt sensitive in unsalted water.
OTOH,
low levels of salt stimulate slime coat turnover. parasites reside in and on the
slime coat. in addition to slime, fish produce secretory antibodies and other
anti-microbial molecules which are secreted with the slime coat. increasing the
production and turn over of slime coat means more antibodies and anti-microbial
molecules available to attach and neutralize parasites. this is the basis of host
control of parasites.
I have never had a problem with my plants and the low level of salt I use.
There is a simple pond test kit for salt which is as easy to use and read as one for
ammonia. It seems the "screw ups" are more likely to occur when people use salt as
"treatment" rather than low levels of salt. I test salt twice a year, spring and
fall.

I think of slime coat turnover as the fish equivalent of humans using soap to wash
their hands. it removes and neutralizes some bacteria. It doesnt really get rid of
all the bacteria, but significantly reduces their numbers. unlike humans, fish swim
in their own feces which makes a robust slime coat even more important.

salt is nothing like antibiotics. prophylactic use of antibiotics in livestock is
not to fight disease, it is used to put on weight in farm animals. and various
other non-antibiotic "salts" are used in livestock to knock down parasite levels.
things like diatomaceous earth. http://home.aol.com/keninga/deagri.htm I am sure
non-farm people hear about long time common remedies for livestock.

The reason I use salt is that both long time koi breeders like Brett and Price who
raised the koi I own use salt in their ponds, and my friend Jo Ann, the leading
fancy Goldfish expert in the US on care, diseases and treatments recommends low level
salt in aquariums. These are not hobby breeders or arm chair experts. These are
people who made/make their living from selling the fish. And especially when they
been successful for a number of years, these are the people I listen to.

Ingrid


Derek Broughton > wrote:
>Salt may be >responsible for creating superbugs.
Salt is definitely an irritant to fish.
Salt is generally not good for plants.

I lost count of the number of people who
>have posted here because they've screwed up the amount of salt.
>
>In the 30+ years I've been keeping fish, salt has _always_ been touted as a
>panacea. It's certainly good as part of a treatment for sick fish, but I
>remain unconvinced that _anything_ unnatural should be used for 24/7
>treatment of problems that don't exist, whether it be prophylactic use of
>salt in fish or antibiotics in livestock.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Derek Broughton]

wrote:

> salt doesnt "create" super bugs. it is not mutagenic.

That's just sophistry. Antibiotics don't create superbugs either. However,
if you have something that kills off 50% of all the bugs, natural selection
pretty soon leaves you with only bugs that aren't affected by that
substance.

> OTOH,
> low levels of salt stimulate slime coat turnover. parasites reside in and
> on the
> slime coat. in addition to slime, fish produce secretory antibodies and

Parasites _on_ the slime coat are not an issue in any sense. Parasites _in_
the slime coat are not serious. Slime coats exist, at least in part, to
prevent parasites actually reaching the fish. Parasites in & on the slime
coat are just evidence that it is doing its job.

> I think of slime coat turnover as the fish equivalent of humans using soap
> to wash
> their hands. it removes and neutralizes some bacteria. It doesnt really
> get rid of
> all the bacteria, but significantly reduces their numbers.

And these days, doctors are saying that soap is irrelevant in the act of
hand-washing. Rather than worry about what type of soap to use, they say,
just make sure you rinse your hands for 30 seconds under the warmest water
you can stand. There are parasites in our epidermis too, but nobody
suggests we should wash our hands with jalpeno peppers to stimulate
epidermal turnover (it would work, though...).

> unlike humans,
> fish swim in their own feces which makes a robust slime coat even more
> important.

And a good reason for not irritating it.

> salt is nothing like antibiotics. prophylactic use of antibiotics in

Well, there's sufficient evidence in my mind to demonstrate that it _is_.

> livestock is
> not to fight disease, it is used to put on weight in farm animals. and
> various other non-antibiotic

You should know better. Antibiotics do not in themselves increase weight.
The aim is to prevent the animal getting sick and _not_ put on weight.

> The reason I use salt is that both long time koi breeders like Brett and
> Price who
> raised the koi I own use salt in their ponds, and my friend Jo Ann, the
> leading fancy Goldfish expert in the US on care, diseases and treatments
> recommends low level
> salt in aquariums. These are not hobby breeders or arm chair experts.

I know, and I respect, their opinions. Brett, in particular, raises huge
numbers of fish - but raising fish on a farm and keeping a half-dozen in
your pond are vastly different tasks. I will use salt for treatment, but
not for prophylaxis.
--
derek

[[email protected]]

It isnt sophistry, it is being scientifically factual, no extra charge.

The reason there are "bubble boys" (children that cannot leave a sterile environment)
is that no amount of antibiotics will actually kill off every single bacteria, so
children born with SCIDS, severe combined immune deficiency cannot recover from
disease no matter how many meds they take because there are ALWAYS bugs that are
immune in every infection. The purpose of anti-microbials is to kill or cripple most
of microbes and get them down to a level where it is possible for the immune system
to get the rest under control.

A healthy fish will have a small number of most parasites under the slime coat. These
parasite are challenging/stimulating the immune system and keeping immunity high.
Lose the parasites and fish lose immunity to them. Fish dont have long term immune
memory like mammals and birds. This is one reason I advocate "closed tanks" in which
new fish are never added when the current residents have been disease free for more
than 6 months to a year.

there are several ways to keep the level of the cooties down so the slime coat and
anti-microbials are effective.

first and foremost is to prevent anything from bringing in high levels of cooties,
like birds pooping in the water, new unquarantined fish, etc.
healthy water quality because fish are always knocking their slime coat off, mine do
this pile up thing for food they think they can smell in a corner of my pond, or pile
up on each other when I toss their food into the pond. then there is spawning in
spring, jumping or rubbing against pots in the pond, etc. with clean water and
healthy fish there just arent the numbers of cooties to get to the epidermis.

Healthy water quality so stress does not take the immune system down in the fish
cause when this happens slime coat thickens, it doesnt turn over properly or contain
sufficient anti-microbials, and then the cooties on and in the fish can explode out
of control.

good high quality food that provides the proper nutrition with low residue (that
fouls the water). the immune system is highly dependent on adequate protein and
energy since immune cells are amount those turn over the fastest in the body.

clean water, ideal year round steady temps and water quality and healthy fish with no
stress are ideal. few of us have ponds like that. In addition to less than ideal
water quality other causes of stress include overstocking, seasonal temperature
fluctuation, spawning. All of these slow the turn over of the slime coat or limit
the amount of anti-microbials being produced.

Low levels of salt helps to make up for the deficits in keeping fish in ponds. That
is why most breeders use salt.

Soap solvates oils and removes microbe laden dirt off the hands, something hot water
wont do. I am willing to bet that hospitals and food services are not just going to
tell their staff to give their hands a good rinse before handling patients or food in
a restaurant.

We have dry epidermis which in and of itself is protective. Wet epidermis, like
lining the guts is more like fish epidermis (which is protected by slime and an outer
epidermis). And yes, it is not coincidence that people who live in parasite thriving
conditions like the tropics all eat hot food like peppers which can knock down the
parasite load. Garlic too is anti-microbial. Maybe they should "save" their
jalapeno and garlic for when they get sick.

The level of antibiotics in animal feed has never been high enough to knock down
infectious agents. http://www.engormix.com/e_articles_dairy_cattle.asp?ID=69
"Antibiotics have been widely used in the livestock and poultry industries since
their discovery more than 50 years ago. They represent an extremely important tool in
the efficient production of animal products such as milk, meat and eggs. At
sub-therapeutic levels in diets, antibiotics improve growth rate and efficiency of
feed utilization (see Table 1), reduce mortality and morbidity and improve
reproductive performance (see Table 2). At high levels (prophylaxis and therapeutic)
antibiotics help to prevent disease in exposed animals and to treat diseases
(Cromwell, 1999)."
notice the term sub-therapeutic.

And as a viral immunologist/microbiologist I will tell everyone that our greatest
threat is not the antibiotics being used by farmers who are limited to a small number
that are already ineffective for humans. Our greatest threat is population
explosions and poverty. People living in stressful conditions without adequate
nutrition, without health care are the breeding grounds for the evolution of highly
pathogenic strains of everything, including those resistant to anti-bacterial and
anti-viral drugs. It is not surprising that multiple drug resistant TB, now
resistant to ALL antibiotics, originated in the jails in Russia where men where
warehoused in abysmal conditions. Drugs cannot cure people who dont have an adequate
immune system.

Ingrid


Derek Broughton > wrote:
>That's just sophistry. Antibiotics don't create superbugs either. However,
>if you have something that kills off 50% of all the bugs, natural selection
>pretty soon leaves you with only bugs that aren't affected by that
>substance.

>Parasites _on_ the slime coat are not an issue in any sense. Parasites _in_
>the slime coat are not serious. Slime coats exist, at least in part, to
>prevent parasites actually reaching the fish. Parasites in & on the slime
>coat are just evidence that it is doing its job.

>And these days, doctors are saying that soap is irrelevant in the act of
>hand-washing. Rather than worry about what type of soap to use, they say,
>just make sure you rinse your hands for 30 seconds under the warmest water
>you can stand. There are parasites in our epidermis too, but nobody
>suggests we should wash our hands with jalpeno peppers to stimulate
>epidermal turnover (it would work, though...).

>You should know better. Antibiotics do not in themselves increase weight.
>The aim is to prevent the animal getting sick and _not_ put on weight.

>I know, and I respect, their opinions. Brett, in particular, raises huge
>numbers of fish - but raising fish on a farm and keeping a half-dozen in
>your pond are vastly different tasks. I will use salt for treatment, but
>not for prophylaxis.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Tom L. La Bron]

Ingrid,

You are blowing it out the other end by saying that
Brett uses salt in this ponds. If you knew anything
about his facility you would know that he has no
choice, in that, the water he uses has a high salt
content. Where he has his farm all the water has a
high salinity.

And by the way, Jo Ann is not a breeder either and
never has been, which you remark insinuates, she was
just a high end LFS owner. The only breeding she ever
saw, was like you, by accident in her ponds by the will
of nature.

So get your story straight.

In addition, all real breeders of Goldfish don't put
salt in their ponds unless they are trying to get rid
of a parasite. In addition, the fish that come from
China and Japan are not raised or bred in water with
low levels of salt. So I guess you don't think that
they don't what they are doing either.

Tom L.L.
----------------------------------------
wrote:

> The reason I use salt is that both long time koi breeders like Brett and Price who
> raised the koi I own use salt in their ponds, and my friend Jo Ann, the leading
> fancy Goldfish expert in the US on care, diseases and treatments recommends low level
> salt in aquariums. These are not hobby breeders or arm chair experts. These are
> people who made/make their living from selling the fish. And especially when they
> been successful for a number of years, these are the people I listen to.
>
> Ingrid

[Derek Broughton]

wrote:

> It isnt sophistry, it is being scientifically factual, no extra charge.

It's pure sophistry when you claim that salt doesn't create superbugs
because it isn't mutagenic. Another description is "straw-man" argument,
since I never suggested it _was_ mutagenic. Now if you want to argue that
the science behind the allegations that use of salt is creating
salt-resistant bugs is faulty, go right ahead. You could be right, but I
still haven't seen enough good science to convince me that I (or my fish)
will benefit from constant use of salt.

> "Antibiotics ... represent an extremely
> important tool in the efficient production of animal products such as
> milk, meat and eggs. At sub-therapeutic levels in diets, antibiotics
....
> 1999)." notice the term sub-therapeutic.

And just what scientific principle explains how they put on weight if it is
_not_ therapeutic? Anyway, sub-therapeutic treatment (regardless of
whether poverty is also a vital component and, remember, South African
President Mbeke nearly got crucified for saying the same of AIDS) is a
proven cause of antibiotic resistance.
--
derek

[[email protected]]

look... this is my field and I teach this ****. I am tired of people saying that
antibiotics "cause" superbugs. they dont. the superbugs are THERE ALL THE TIME.
to find resistant bugs all you have to do is do a water extraction of dirt and plate
that out onto agar and drop antibiotic disks onto the plate. there are bacteria
resistant to all the antibiotics. Most of the resistant bacteria are "free range"
and dont normally infect humans.
every time a person gets infected the bacteria replicates and is mutating NATURALLY
and no antibiotic or anti viral medication on earth is going to kill 100% of all the
bugs unless the medicine is used in such high concentration that it kills the host
too.
antibiotics and salt can only increase the population of superbugs by selection, but
cannot "create" them. most of the time the superbugs are the result of exchange of
DNA between different species of bacteria.

I am not aware of anyone with data on why SUB therapeutic levels of antibiotics
results in weight gain. It is just a well known fact. sorta like aspirin and
quinine was used for thousands of years without knowing the mechanism of action.

the use of antibiotics does not CAUSE antibiotic resistance, it can only increase the
population of resistant bacteria in a person. So a person that doesnt take the full
course of antibiotics may allow resistant bacteria to escape OR pass on resistant
genes to other bacteria in the gut and from the gut shed into the environment.
However, resistance genes can pass to other bacteria whether or not people are taking
the antibiotics properly. we now have strains of bacteria popping up that are
resistant to even the "last ditch" antibiotics and these antibiotics are NOT passed
out like candy but use monitored extremely closely. No abuse but the resistant
strains are there anyway.

antibiotics used in sub therapeutics doses are not the ones used for therapeutic
doses anymore.
Ingrid

Derek Broughton > wrote:
>It's pure sophistry when you claim that salt doesn't create superbugs
>because it isn't mutagenic. Another description is "straw-man" argument,
>since I never suggested it _was_ mutagenic. Now if you want to argue that
>the science behind the allegations that use of salt is creating
>salt-resistant bugs is faulty, go right ahead. You could be right, but I
>still haven't seen enough good science to convince me that I (or my fish)
>will benefit from constant use of salt.
>

>And just what scientific principle explains how they put on weight if it is
>_not_ therapeutic? Anyway, sub-therapeutic treatment (regardless of
>whether poverty is also a vital component and, remember, South African
>President Mbeke nearly got crucified for saying the same of AIDS) is a
>proven cause of antibiotic resistance.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[figaro]

Can't we all agree that antibiotics "cause" the conditions that allow
naturally resistant bacteria to proliferate to a degree where mutation into
an even more resistant strain is more likely simply because the other
bacteria are no longer around to compete with the superbugs therby allowing
the superbugs to exchange genes more frequently leading to homozygocity of
the resistance genes and the possibility of faster evolution to a really
nasty bug through the natural mutation of these homozygous superbugs? So in
a sense, the natural selection process not only leads to natural superbugs
but "causes" the conditions for these natural superbugs to evolve into even
stronger strains. I think you are both saying basically the same thing but
the average person is not going to understand the nuance of your arguments
and the average person has a much easier time understanding that antibiotics
"cause" superbugs even though this is not factually accurate.



> From:
> Newsgroups: rec.ponds
> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:02:06 GMT
> Subject: Re: salt
>
> look... this is my field and I teach this ****. I am tired of people saying
> that
> antibiotics "cause" superbugs. they dont. the superbugs are THERE ALL THE
> TIME.
> to find resistant bugs all you have to do is do a water extraction of dirt and
> plate
> that out onto agar and drop antibiotic disks onto the plate. there are
> bacteria
> resistant to all the antibiotics. Most of the resistant bacteria are "free
> range"
> and dont normally infect humans.
> every time a person gets infected the bacteria replicates and is mutating
> NATURALLY
> and no antibiotic or anti viral medication on earth is going to kill 100% of
> all the
> bugs unless the medicine is used in such high concentration that it kills the
> host
> too.
> antibiotics and salt can only increase the population of superbugs by
> selection, but
> cannot "create" them. most of the time the superbugs are the result of
> exchange of
> DNA between different species of bacteria.
>
> I am not aware of anyone with data on why SUB therapeutic levels of
> antibiotics
> results in weight gain. It is just a well known fact. sorta like aspirin and
> quinine was used for thousands of years without knowing the mechanism of
> action.
>
> the use of antibiotics does not CAUSE antibiotic resistance, it can only
> increase the
> population of resistant bacteria in a person. So a person that doesnt take
> the full
> course of antibiotics may allow resistant bacteria to escape OR pass on
> resistant
> genes to other bacteria in the gut and from the gut shed into the environment.
> However, resistance genes can pass to other bacteria whether or not people are
> taking
> the antibiotics properly. we now have strains of bacteria popping up that are
> resistant to even the "last ditch" antibiotics and these antibiotics are NOT
> passed
> out like candy but use monitored extremely closely. No abuse but the
> resistant
> strains are there anyway.
>
> antibiotics used in sub therapeutics doses are not the ones used for
> therapeutic
> doses anymore.
> Ingrid
>
> Derek Broughton > wrote:
>> It's pure sophistry when you claim that salt doesn't create superbugs
>> because it isn't mutagenic. Another description is "straw-man" argument,
>> since I never suggested it _was_ mutagenic. Now if you want to argue that
>> the science behind the allegations that use of salt is creating
>> salt-resistant bugs is faulty, go right ahead. You could be right, but I
>> still haven't seen enough good science to convince me that I (or my fish)
>> will benefit from constant use of salt.
>>
>
>> And just what scientific principle explains how they put on weight if it is
>> _not_ therapeutic? Anyway, sub-therapeutic treatment (regardless of
>> whether poverty is also a vital component and, remember, South African
>> President Mbeke nearly got crucified for saying the same of AIDS) is a
>> proven cause of antibiotic resistance.
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
> http://puregold.aquaria.net/
> www.drsolo.com
> Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
> compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
> endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Derek Broughton]

figaro wrote:

> Can't we all agree that antibiotics "cause" the conditions that allow
> naturally resistant bacteria to proliferate to a degree where mutation

Probably not. I understand Ingrid's points perfectly, but it's still just
trying to sidestep the issue. In fact, superbugs have *not* always been
present. They mutate. Use of antibiotics speeds up natural selection.
Whether you call that "cause" or want to pretend that we were going to have
to face these same bugs later rather than sooner is all that's being
discussed.

So, back to salt. There are now bugs resistant to salt that didn't use to
be. In the interest of not speeding up the process of natural selection to
result in more of them, I don't plan to use "sub-therapeutic" levels of
salt in my pond.
--
derek

[[email protected]]

misuse of antibiotics may cause an overgrowth or expansion of superbugs. the genes
for antibiotic resistance are already there. BTW, strep for some reason has been
very slow to get genes for ANY resistant to plain old penicillin. I think I heard
some have finally been found. but it may be that strep cannot get the genes from
other bacteria.
you see.... fungi make naturally occurring antibiotics and local bacteria have slowly
evolved anti-antibiotic genes over millions and millions of years. they been at this
evolving thing far, far longer than we have.
superbugs got more copies of the plasmids carrying the resistance genes.
average persons need to know the difference. but I will admit many physicians seem
to miss the point. most certainly journalists do.
the problem is the screw up with cause and effect, a very weak link in thinking that
makes me crazy, and is a major problem with critical thinking.
an example:
somebody asks people who had heart attacks were asked what they drink.
most drink coffee and lots of it.
ergo, coffee CAUSES heart attacks.
researcher with some idea of how to conduct research of this kind asks the families
of people who DIED from their heart attacks what their loved one drank.
most DID NOT drink coffee
ergo, there is no cause and effect relationship between coffee consumption and heart
attacks.
the same fuzzy thinking occurs with salt consumption and high blood pressure (no
correlation), high cholesterol and heart attacks (no correlation) but I bet everyone
on this list believes high salt consumption leads to high blood pressure or that
limiting salt consumption can lower blood pressure; that heart attacks are CAUSED by
high cholesterol too.
I am a teacher, therefore I teach.
Ingrid

figaro > wrote:
>Can't we all agree that antibiotics "cause" the conditions that allow
>naturally resistant bacteria to proliferate to a degree where mutation into
>an even more resistant strain is more likely simply because the other
>bacteria are no longer around to compete with the superbugs therby allowing
>the superbugs to exchange genes more frequently leading to homozygocity of
>the resistance genes and the possibility of faster evolution to a really
>nasty bug through the natural mutation of these homozygous superbugs? So in
>a sense, the natural selection process not only leads to natural superbugs
>but "causes" the conditions for these natural superbugs to evolve into even
>stronger strains. I think you are both saying basically the same thing but
>the average person is not going to understand the nuance of your arguments
>and the average person has a much easier time understanding that antibiotics
>"cause" superbugs even though this is not factually accurate.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[[email protected]]

the genes for antibiotics have existed for millions and millions of years.
the genes for resistance to antibiotics have existed for millions and millions of
years.
the genes have mostly been isolated to only small areas where the organisms were
found.
these genes can be transferred to different strains and species of bacteria by
conjunction and resistance is almost always do to increase NUMBERS of copies of the
resistance genes.
many other things are also responsible for resistance:
most humans with poor immune systems died before they were 1 year old, died when
seriously injured, died when suffering malnutrition, died when they reached about 45
years or so. they werent around long enough to incubate resistant bacteria.
Most humans didnt travel more than a few miles from where they were born so they
werent spreading the resistant bacteria around
Most people used to die in hospitals from infections aquired in hospitals if not from
what brought them to the hospital and didnt spread them around.
antibiotic resistance is a multi-factor problem. The WORST OFFENDERS, incubators and
spreaders of superbugs are the people in hospitals. because they dont wash their
hands (with soap of course) before touching a patient and second because some of them
are CARRIERS which means no amount of washing is going to remove some kinds of nasty
bacteria like staph. AND.. hospitals are where the very, very sick people are, where
incubation of various types of bacteria giving them the chance to exchange genes is
going on. and the people work in the hospital pick these superbugs up and carry them
all over.
nobody gets vancamycin OTC and STILL there are bacteria resistant to this antibiotic.
they didnt mutate to get this resistance, the genes were already out there.
different antibiotics have different mechanisms of action. no bacteria starts from
"scratch" and makes a resistance gene by mutation. there are always mutations of
existing genes going on, and sooner or later there are going to be bacteria make a
gene that is mutated and resistant to every new antibiotic... unless we come up with
some NEW mechanisms of action or classes of antibiotics.
for this reason they are studying those "anti-microbial" proteins made by fish and
secreted into their slime coat.
you want to stop the spread of superbugs??? get the hospitals to start checking the
hands of their people and institute a required washing of hands before touching a
patient. my mother got a nosocomial infection and she was in a hospital where there
was carpeting on the floors for god sake. at least in wisconsin the hospital aquired
infection rate is SECRET. by law they dont have to report to ANYBODY when a person
gets an infection they didnt come in with.
the second suspected incubator is sewage systems, where raw sewage is dumped into
water where people or animals have contact.

back to salt. yes. my fish probably have salt resistant bugs on them since many of
them they came from Prices koi farm and therefore I wouldnt think of using salt as a
"treatment". I would say even one fish with salt resistant bugs will pass them to
all fish in the pond so basically nobody should be using salt for treatment.
since it is useless for treatment it is much better for it to be used as a
prophylactic since it is excellent in this capacity. Ingrid

Derek Broughton > wrote:
>Probably not. I understand Ingrid's points perfectly, but it's still just
>trying to sidestep the issue. In fact, superbugs have *not* always been
>present. They mutate. Use of antibiotics speeds up natural selection.
>Whether you call that "cause" or want to pretend that we were going to have
>to face these same bugs later rather than sooner is all that's being
>discussed.
>
>So, back to salt. There are now bugs resistant to salt that didn't use to
>be. In the interest of not speeding up the process of natural selection to
>result in more of them, I don't plan to use "sub-therapeutic" levels of
>salt in my pond.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Crashj]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:42:27 GMT, wrote:
<>
>an example:
>somebody asks people who had heart attacks were asked what they drink.
>most drink coffee and lots of it.
>ergo, coffee CAUSES heart attacks.
>researcher with some idea of how to conduct research of this kind asks the families
>of people who DIED from their heart attacks what their loved one drank.
>most DID NOT drink coffee
>ergo, there is no cause and effect relationship between coffee consumption and heart
>attacks.
>the same fuzzy thinking occurs with salt consumption and high blood pressure (no
>correlation), high cholesterol and heart attacks (no correlation) but I bet everyone
>on this list believes high salt consumption leads to high blood pressure or that
>limiting salt consumption can lower blood pressure; that heart attacks are CAUSED by
>high cholesterol too.
<>
"Everyone on this list?" What an un-teacherly thing to say. Many,
most, a lot, whatever. As Red Green says, "I'm not a lot of people."
So how's your homocysteine level?
I'm with you on your general assesment of public health ideology and
the misunderstanding of the issue of the overuse of antibiotics.
And salt, too, apparently.
--
Crashj

[Ka30P]

Ingrid wrote >>but I bet everyone
>on this list believes high salt consumption leads to high blood pressure or
that
>limiting salt consumption can lower blood pressure; that heart attacks are
CAUSED by
>high cholesterol too. <<

Everyone???
I disincline to acquiesce to that assertion.



kathy :-)
algae primer
http://hometown.aol.com/ka30p/myhomepage/garden.html

[Derek Broughton]

wrote:

> the same fuzzy thinking occurs with salt consumption and high blood
> pressure (no correlation), high cholesterol and heart attacks (no

I resent the fact that you insist on making a personal attack out of this.

Just point me to the scientific data proving me wrong...
--
derek

[Derek Broughton]

wrote:

> the genes for antibiotics have existed for millions and millions of years.
> the genes for resistance to antibiotics have existed for millions and
> millions of years.

no argument

> many other things are also responsible for resistance:

no argument.

> Most people used to die in hospitals from infections aquired in hospitals
> if not from what brought them to the hospital and didnt spread them
> around.
> antibiotic resistance is a multi-factor problem.

Absolutely no argument.

> The WORST OFFENDERS, incubators and
> spreaders of superbugs are the people in hospitals. because they dont

Absolutely. Talk to my cousin (a nurse), our aunt caught MRSA _twice_ in a
British hospital, and my cousin blames the nursing staff in the hospital.

> nobody gets vancamycin OTC and STILL there are bacteria resistant to this
> antibiotic. they didnt mutate to get this resistance, the genes were

More straw men. I've never once claimed that the bugs mutate to gain
resistance. However, you and I have both mentioned that bacteria _do_
mutate quite readily. It's not the issue.

> there are always
> mutations of existing genes going on, and sooner or later there are going
> to be bacteria make a gene that is mutated and resistant to every new
> antibiotic...

And indiscriminate use of antibiotics results in leaving the available gene
pool smaller, and more weighted with the genes that are resistant to that
antibiotic.

> you want to stop the spread of superbugs??? get the hospitals to start
> checking the hands of their people and institute a required washing of
> hands before touching a patient.

Again, no arguments, see above. With respect to ponds, the corresponding
rule of thumb is to make sure your water quality is the best you can make
it, and your fish will rarely get sick.

> back to salt. yes. my fish probably have salt resistant bugs on them
> since many of them they came from Prices koi farm and therefore I wouldnt
> think of using salt as a
> "treatment". I would say even one fish with salt resistant bugs will pass
> them to all fish in the pond so basically nobody should be using salt for
> treatment. since it is useless for treatment it is much better for it to
> be used as a
> prophylactic since it is excellent in this capacity. Ingrid

That's not even remotely logical. If it isn't useful for treatment, it's
even less use as a prophylactic.
--
derek

[[email protected]]

I rarely meet anyone who believes otherwise. What a pleasant surprise. Ingrid


(Ka30P) wrote:
>Everyone???
>I disincline to acquiesce to that assertion.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Crashj]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 14:48:29 GMT, wrote:

>I rarely meet anyone who believes otherwise. What a pleasant surprise. Ingrid
<>
I hang out with a group of people who are very well informed, for
amateurs. We are looking for physicians who want to help us learn more
about the professional side of health maintenance. This would be an
opportunity to make money for your informed opinions and advice. Heart
Health is a special part of our concerns, along with proper nutrition.
Contact me by email if you want to learn more.
hardie at gonowmail.com will reach me.
--
Crashj