What's the best SALT?

And Instant Ocean is the best salt.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



Wayne Sallee wrote on 1/21/2006 5:56 PM:
Well belive it or not, Kent is just instant ocean salt. If you don't
belive me you can go around asking your LFS.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



Roy wrote on 1/21/2006 4:49 PM:

Come on Wayne why would Kent salt be the same as IO? Its contrary to
what lab results have shown on the various breakdowns of synthetic sea
salts commonly available. Its not even close to being Instant
Ocean.........

http://saltaquarium.about.com/cs/seasaltmixes/l/aa090503b.htmY'all
check it out and see what lab tests have shown....


Instant Ocean is a great salt so is Oceanic, and so is any other brand
that works for you..........If I was to guess since I do not really
know, the LFS is making more profit from Kent in more ways than one,
not only from the standpoint of margin of profit it costs them as
compared to I/O but probably as a way to be able to sell more of the
numerous KENT line of products to sup0plement what other salts already
have sufficiient quanities of.......Yea its a numbers game and a
marketing game, but Kent leaves a lot to be desired in lots of their
products........

Salt water is salt water if its got the same degree of salt content
generally speaking and is totally interchangeable with any
other......all thats going to vary for the most part which should not
create problems is trace minerals.........But like another posted
already " If it ain't broke why fix it?"

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 19:45:49 GMT, Wayne Sallee
wrote:

Your LFS is lying to you. Kent is Instant Ocean in a Kent Bag.

The idea of not using different salts, is a scare tactic to keep
people from swiching salts.

The bit of trugh that lies in that statement is that some salt
manufactures have used in the past, or currently use (I have not
found anyone yet that does)EDTA (artificial clarifier). If your
salts do not, then there is no problem with mixing.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



Peter Pan wrote on 1/21/2006 1:25 PM:
I've been using Instant Ocean since I set up my 75 Gal. FOWLR
tank in 2002 and never had a problem. I've read that its not
really a good idea to change salt, but if you were to change it,
it was a very lengthy process with mixing your current salt with
the new stuff until your completly changed over.( the process
should take several months.
My local LFS said that KENT was better for my tank then
using Instant Ocean. What im wondering is; Is it better for his
profits or is it really a better product for my tank?
Thanks

Hi Wayne,

The assertion that Instant Ocean is the best salt seems to run contrary
to a study published in the March, 2003 issue of Reefkeeping. Here's a
link to that article:
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/20...ture/index.php

The article describes a bio-assay experiment comparing several
different salt mixes (unfortunately Kent wasn't among them) to natural
salt water by comparing the development of sea urchin larvae in each.
The article goes into great detail about the methodology, a statistical
analysis of the results, and certain inferences drawn from a chemical
analysis of the commercial products.

The bottom line of the testing was that Instant Ocean and Coralife came
out looking pretty bad, both in terms of urchin development and of the
levels of undesirable metals in the products.

Of the salts tested, the winner by a pretty fair margin seems to be
Crystal Seas Marinemix - Bioassay Formula made by Marine Enterprises
International, Inc. This product's make-up was the closest to NSW and
it actually had a slightly better urchin development result than did
NSW.


Brackishly yours,

Alex

Tidepool Geek wrote:

Of the salts tested, the winner by a pretty fair margin seems to be
Crystal Seas Marinemix - Bioassay Formula made by Marine Enterprises
International, Inc. This product's make-up was the closest to NSW and
it actually had a slightly better urchin development result than did
NSW.

Just did a quick search and found this on Reef Central ...

Crystal Seas Marinemix causes bleaching?

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...12#post1179412

Opinions?

"Tidepool Geek" wrote in message oups.com...
The assertion that Instant Ocean is the best salt seems to run contrary
to a study published in the March, 2003 issue of Reefkeeping. Here's a
link to that article:
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/20...ture/index.php

The article describes a bio-assay experiment comparing several
different salt mixes (unfortunately Kent wasn't among them) to natural
salt water by comparing the development of sea urchin larvae in each.
The article goes into great detail about the methodology, a statistical
analysis of the results, and certain inferences drawn from a chemical
analysis of the commercial products.

The bottom line of the testing was that Instant Ocean and Coralife came
out looking pretty bad, both in terms of urchin development and of the
levels of undesirable metals in the products.

Of the salts tested, the winner by a pretty fair margin seems to be
Crystal Seas Marinemix - Bioassay Formula made by Marine Enterprises
International, Inc. This product's make-up was the closest to NSW and
it actually had a slightly better urchin development result than did
NSW.

I wonder why then so many marine zoology labolatories and
commercial aquariums like Chciago Oceanarium are using
the same salf which is so bad... What would be the purpose
of studying a marine animal development in a salt mix causing
damage and negatively influencing development ?

Have you got the chance to hear the opinion of salt manufacturer ?
Have you tried to find a different explanations for the test results ?

The new Aquarium in ATlanta has gone with Instant Ocean salt.....I
seen pics of the truck load of salt they got in during the filling of
the thing.....Now if memory serves me right, Kent is based out of
Georgia, and not too fara form ATlanta region, so if Kent salt was
nothing more than IO in a Kent bag, why did they not save bunches of
money and get it directly from Kent right down the road instead of
paying shipping costs to have it sent in from IO.......Perhaps Wayne
can tellus....
--
\\\|///
( @ @ )
-----------oOOo(_)oOOo---------------


oooO
---------( )----Oooo----------------
\ ( ( )
\_) ) /
(_/
The original frugal ponder! Koi-ahoi mates....

"Roy" wrote in message ...
The new Aquarium in ATlanta has gone with Instant Ocean salt.....I
seen pics of the truck load of salt they got in during the filling of
the thing.....Now if memory serves me right, Kent is based out of
Georgia, and not too fara form ATlanta region, so if Kent salt was
nothing more than IO in a Kent bag, why did they not save bunches of
money and get it directly from Kent right down the road instead of
paying shipping costs to have it sent in from IO.......Perhaps Wayne
can tellus....

Easy explanation would be that KENT is targeting retail market,
with this repacking IO salt for hobbists, not big commercial institutions.
In other words - it prooves nothing.

1-800-822-1100
Call Aquarium System tech support and find out.

I doubt Kent and IO is the same


"Roy" wrote in message
...
The new Aquarium in ATlanta has gone with Instant Ocean salt.....I
seen pics of the truck load of salt they got in during the filling of
the thing.....Now if memory serves me right, Kent is based out of
Georgia, and not too fara form ATlanta region, so if Kent salt was
nothing more than IO in a Kent bag, why did they not save bunches of
money and get it directly from Kent right down the road instead of
paying shipping costs to have it sent in from IO.......Perhaps Wayne
can tellus....
--
\\\|///
( @ @ )
-----------oOOo(_)oOOo---------------


oooO
---------( )----Oooo----------------
\ ( ( )
\_) ) /
(_/
The original frugal ponder! Koi-ahoi mates....

Roy wrote:
The new Aquarium in ATlanta has gone with Instant Ocean salt.....I
seen pics of the truck load of salt they got in during the filling of
the thing.....Now if memory serves me right, Kent is based out of
Georgia, and not too fara form ATlanta region, so if Kent salt was
nothing more than IO in a Kent bag, why did they not save bunches of
money and get it directly from Kent right down the road instead of
paying shipping costs to have it sent in from IO.......Perhaps Wayne
can tellus....

Well, if Kent is simply repackaging IO, and the aquarium is buying truckloads of
salt just like Kent is, then they should be able to get it from IO for about
what Kent pays for it. That would make IO cheaper for them.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

The topic of this thread is "What is the best salt" for a home
aquarium. Questions about the salt used by unidentified laboratories
and a public aquarium that buys 100,000+ pounds of salt for one exhibit
have little or no validity within this context. To establish the
validity of your point, you should document the answers to these
questions yourself.

It is likewise inappropriate for you to expect me to research points
that are in opposition to my own. I read Shimek's original bio-assay
article in Reefkeeping and was satisfied by his methodology, his
conclusions, and his inferences. Note that there is a difference
between a conclusion and an inference and that Shimek was careful to
avoid confusion between the two in his article and that I was careful
to do the same in my post.

Quite frankly, I have very little interest in whether there might be an
alternative cause for the test results. The various salts were obtained
in the same form in which a hobbyist would expect to get them and any
alternate explanation, however unlikely, would be just as much cause
for concern as is the possibility of metals toxicity. FWIW: I've read
discussions about this article on several different forums and could
find NO valid refutation of Shimek's findings even though there were
many people who fervently wished to disagree.

Google site searches of the IO and Coralife websites showed no sign of
any refutation of Shimek's article. If you're interested, the terms I
searched on we Shimek, assay, urchin, and larvae.

So, if you wish to continue this discussion, here are a list of
questions that you need to address:

1. What research labs are using either IO or Coralife and why?

2. Is the Shedd Aquarium (Chicago Oceanarium) using the same IO product
that is marketed to hobbyist customers?

3. Why has Shedd chosen IO?

4. Is there an alternative explanation for the results that would
result in a positive recommendation for IO or Coralife?

5. Have IO, Coralife, or any other entity published any sort of
repeatable work that refutes Shimek's study?

It's incumbent on you to answer these questions with facts rather than
supposition and, if you really want to have a rational debate, to back
up those facts with confirmable sources.

Halitically yours,

Alex

"Tidepool Geek" wrote in message oups.com...
The topic of this thread is "What is the best salt" for a home
aquarium. Questions about the salt used by unidentified laboratories
and a public aquarium that buys 100,000+ pounds of salt for one exhibit
have little or no validity within this context.

This is your opinion. My opinion is quite different :-)

Those questions should motivate you to think about the issue.
You could wonder "why IO, so bad salt, is used by scientists
in their experiments?" or "why IO, so bad salt, is used by
commercial institutions interested in the maximum profit
from their exhibits - why would they use salt giving bad results?"
or "there are thousands of hobbyists using IO salt and they
have successful tanks - would it be possible if IO was so bad?"
Answer yourself all this questions and make your own decision
not being manipulated by not-exactly-fair competitors game.

To establish the
validity of your point, you should document the answers to these
questions yourself.

I am convinced IO is good salt - have been using it with great
success for over 3 years in my tanks. Fish only, reef and breeding
maroon clownfish. There is no reason to be affraid of IO salt
and buy overpriced salts which claim they are "better".

It is likewise inappropriate for you to expect me to research points
that are in opposition to my own. I read Shimek's original bio-assay
article in Reefkeeping and was satisfied by his methodology, his
conclusions, and his inferences. Note that there is a difference
between a conclusion and an inference and that Shimek was careful to
avoid confusion between the two in his article and that I was careful
to do the same in my post.

Hearing only one side of the issue does not make you a good judge.

Quite frankly, I have very little interest in whether there might be an
alternative cause for the test results. The various salts were obtained
in the same form in which a hobbyist would expect to get them and any
alternate explanation, however unlikely, would be just as much cause
for concern as is the possibility of metals toxicity. FWIW: I've read
discussions about this article on several different forums and could
find NO valid refutation of Shimek's findings even though there were
many people who fervently wished to disagree.

The fact you did not find something is not a valid proof it does not exist.

Google site searches of the IO and Coralife websites showed no sign of
any refutation of Shimek's article. If you're interested, the terms I
searched on we Shimek, assay, urchin, and larvae.

I have heard opinion about Shimek's article from the salt manufacturer.
He has pointed out several flaws in the article and the experiment itself.
Now I have a better picture after hearing both: the prosecutor and
the "victims" advocate.