Anyone do their WC without declorinator?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
dont declorinate

however i wouldnt go doing a 50% wc either

20% once a week with no chemicals is fine.

The chlorine in most water supplies is already diluted so much that 20% basically makes it non existent.

However due to the nature of humans to make mistakes make sure you take a sniff

the other day i went to do a water change and i smelled the water reeked of chlorine called the city turns out someone spilled the bucket of chlorine into our city water supply...good game city water people lol
 
spongebob281;3747572; said:
How did you come up with 2-300G per week = $ 7 of declorinator a year? I do about the same amount of WC and i go thru API bottle like it's beer :D


A 1 gallon jug costs me about $35, it lasts about 5 years.

If I use 1ml per 20 gallons as instructed: 1 Gallon contains 3785ml. So that treats 75,700 gallons of water. If I change 250 gallons a week I am good for 303 weeks which is 5.8 years.
 
kdrun76;3747835; said:
A 1 gallon jug costs me about $35, it lasts about 5 years.

If I use 1ml per 20 gallons as instructed: 1 Gallon contains 3785ml. So that treats 75,700 gallons of water. If I change 250 gallons a week I am good for 303 weeks which is 5.8 years.

Two 30 packs of Coors light $37 and change when it's on sale. 4 to 6 beers a day which is 10 to 15 days :headbang2

I just spend my money different :naughty:
 
Egon;3747767; said:
Not the advertisement on the bottle, actual data like a test with a control population and so on.

I doubt it, lets wait and see.........

No one seems to have hard evidence "untreated water" is bad for the fish. I would love to see a side by side "taste test" or some other actual experiment. One tank with treated water only and one tank with untreated water (control) same fish, same temps, same food. Kinda like a consumer reports test.

Untreated water = potable water that comes out of the tap. I just don't understand how this can be bad for fish. I do understand the advertisement for the treated water would like people to believe the water is bad. There just making money..........anyway enough of that rant. To each his own I guess.

Wow never seen someone so proud of his ignorance. As for proof there is tons of proof about the affects of chloramine, chlorine, and ammonia on fish. 10 minutes actually researching it and you can find it. Here is just one link if you take the time to read it. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/library/redbook.pdf

or this. http://weblife.org/humanure/chapter5_8.html

FYI the water out of the tap is far from untreated. For the most part it is required that it is treated... with chorine and or chloramine (which by the way will often break down to ammonia I guess you dont think ammonia is bad for fish either?). So this is not "natural" water coming from the stream. If it was then it would often be safe for fish, but since it is not that is why we must treat it to get rid of the affects of it being treated.

Just because it is safe for us to drink in no way indicates it is safe for fish to live in. In fact the primary problem with chloramine and chlorine with fish is it affects their gills and ability to breath. I dont know about you but personally I dont have gills.

Or take for example my tap water which is perfectly safe for me to drink. It also happens to be hard water with a high PH. Certainly not a healthy environment for discus for example. The fact is the water fish need for a healthy environment is often very different from the water we need to safely drink.

Or looking at it another way my fish tank water is very safe for my fish, but if I made a habit of drinking it then it could be very toxic to me. Fish and humans are very different and what is "safe" for one often is not for the other.

The fact that people may or may not have success not treating their water is far from "proof" that chlorine is not harmful. Concentrations and situations are different everywhere. It will depend on the fish, the water supply, and the tank (tanks with heavy bio-load are affected less). The one thing research is clear on though is chlorine and chloramines are harmful to fish. Depending on concentrations and the fish it may cause them stress... or it may kill them.

For the 10 dollars a year I spend on prime for a house full of fish tanks I have no idea why someone would want to subject their fish to toxic chemicals so they can buy a 6 pack of beer.
 
I've always used prime for my water changes whether it's 20% or 50%. There have been times however when I was out and it didn't seem to make a difference. I do agree with most people though for the minimal cost of dechlor why not use it. It would cost a whole lot more if your fish died because you didn't take the 2 seconds to pour a few capfuls of prime in.
 
mdb_talon;3747995; said:
I dont know about you but personally I dont have gills.
you can compare it to inhaling chlorine gas, since our lungs do the same thing gills do for fish. and yes chlorine gas is pretty toxic.


thanks for the link to the pdfs.
 
Egon;3747642; said:
It surprises me how loyal the "water treaters" are to their product. They will defend their product with terms like chorine and clorimane (spell) and the health of your fish, bla, bla bla.
\
some people see the value in science.

fish, cats, people are all different animals with different needs. I try not to be jerk on these forums, but seriously are those really your views?
 
I dont use dechlor for my fresh tank but i have a well
 
mdb_talon;3747995; said:
For the 10 dollars a year I spend on prime for a house full of fish tanks I have no idea why someone would want to subject their fish to toxic chemicals so they can buy a 6 pack of beer.

:chillpill: Look it's just an opinion. I live in the U.S. My family and I drink and cook with the same water I give my fish and other animals (cats, dogs). I believe the beer is also made with the same water LOL.

What I don't understand is the hierarchy of importance placed on the use of water treatment. If treating the water is so important for the fish why then don't people treat their drinking and cooking water with Prime or what ever is used to treat fish water? Why are the fish more important? Is it just me or is this odd? Also, and even more fascinating to me is why are people so emotional about their water treatment for their fish? Honestly?
I personally don't see the need to treat fish water any differently than my own drinking water. If one feels like spending their last 10 bucks on water treatment instead of a six pack of beer, fine. Maybe I place too much importance on sitting back and enjoying a cold one while watching my fish. Along the same lines the water treatment guys enjoy mixing water and other chemicals in a large bucket and poring it in their fish tank. Who am I to judge? We are all enjoying fish keeping in our own ways.
BRB......getting another beer. :grinno:
 
Egon;3748582; said:
:chillpill: Look it's just an opinion. I live in the U.S. My family and I drink and cook with the same water I give my fish and other animals (cats, dogs). I believe the beer is also made with the same water LOL.
what is wrong with your logic.

chlorine doesnt enter our blood stream from the digestive system!

chlorine does enter the fish's blood stream from its gills!

people that use dialysis machines, can not use chlorinated water in it because it enters their blood stream and makes them sick.
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com