This is going to be my last post on this thread. My intention from the beginning was to save fish; by appealing to those who prescribe salt as a common cure. And discuss the other (side) affects of salt rather than the classic discussion about the osmotic affect that salt has in fish.
Understood. Sometimes, it's the delivery, not so much the goods, which spoil one's appetite.
And it appears that i came off passionate to some and abrasive to others. So therefore this is my attempt to hit the reset button.
Appreciated. Not only by myself, but by the other's as well I am sure.
In light of my previous posts the last data point id like everyone to consider in regards to using salt. Is the topic of salt resistant parasites in the hobby that are clearly resistant to salt but appear now to be resistant to some older fish meds as well.
This is actually a point worth covering, as like with many parasites, bacteria and fungi, noted resistance in common strains is one thing that all aquarist should educated themselves on. No matter the treatment preference, be it salt or medications, the threat of more aggressive and resilient infections from all of the above, is real, and an excellent example of why proper quarentines, close observation, well maintained environments as well as enriched diets should be applied. Prevention is key, but when disease/infection strikes, one needs to realize that with now reinforced tolerances, these ailments are likely to become more difficult (in some situations) to remedy than they previously have been.
In the good ol days we would increase the osmotic pressure by adding salt and dip our prized fish which resulted with the flukes falling off. These days doing salt dips for these resistant types of ich doesn't work.
Not so much that it doesn't work, but rather that in some cases, with specific strains/organisms, it's become less effective, resulting in the need to supplement with other treatments, longer regamines, and sometimes repeated courses of chosen treatment, before an animal might fully recover and the parasite/infection be terminated. Luckily this doesn't apply across the board, and in many instances, salt treatments are still highly effective and a more gentle alternative to other medications
So its common place that increased doses are used in a dip salt concentrate which often leaves fish with burnt gills while many times they die from gill damage.
Here, I'd be inclined to disagree. While many have been tempted to do such (and objectively speaking, many have tried, sometimes with sucess, and other times with negative results), I wouldn't go as far as to say that it's become "common place". With any treatment, the owner needs to be aware that there are benefits, as well as potential consequences, and that while with proper execution, any given treatment may work wonderfully, with minimal stress/side effects to your fish, too much of a good thing is never a good thing. Those that routinely practice treatments by way of salt (or really, any medication or alternative approach), for the most part understand it's limiations, and the fish's capacity of tolerance. But likewise, some do not, nor do they take the time to discover such, and in those instances, it is more common to note afflictions as you've mentioned; being that of gill burns, potential internal complications, and other external irritations/damage. These side effects though, cannot be limited to only one source (being salt), as I and several others I am sure, have also witnessed negative effects of commercial medications on an animal. That is not to say that one works "better" than another. We must understand that each, in their own right, has their benefits, and likewise their drawbacks and limitations, which is why in some instances, one is preferred over the other, or one is used in combination with another. Determining the proper course of action when faced with any number of conditions, the most important thing for an owner to recognize, and fully comprehend, is which treatment would proove the most effective towards the issue, and least damaging towards the animal. It is a balancing act, of which the weight of each element varies with the condition at hand, and the state of the animal; much like with modern human medicinal practices and treatments.
And im sure there are several reasons though im sure not exhaustive. To explain perhaps why there are salt resisistant types of parasites.
Sure there are. Perhaps the simplest and most easy explanation would be that of sheer evolution. All organisms possess the ability to establish immunities, or in the least, resistances towards harmful or potentially lethal attacks on one's being. Take for example the flu. One hundred years ago, this viral infection was widely feared and marked a most certain death sentence for any who became afflicted with it. With modern medicine to help, but also improved dietary supplements, living conditions, as well as hygiene, etc. this viral family is now more of a annoyance, rather than a true medical concern for the vast majority of individuals (excepting of course those who suffer from any number of additional complications such as immuno deficiencies, frail health (such as with the elderly), or pre-existing medical conditions). But even though we ourselves have become more tolerant to this virus, the viruses themselves have also become increasingly tolerant to our methods of extinguishment, birthing new mutations of which we must constantly counteract. Such is the natural course of living things. Revert back to the old "Survival of the fittest" saying and it might click.
One might consider is the fish meal, which is high to extremely high in sodium these days which make up our fish feed (pellets) Ive done typical analysis on these feeds and even hikari puts salt in there feeds! Just like the american diet is high in sodium our fish also it would seem may have a diet to high in sodium. This would be a great thesis paper for someone to do. Another is feeder fish that are bred and raised with salt added to the water like a tonic. To feeding salt water fish filets to freshwater fish.
Yes, while that may be true, it's important to note that such is done as a means to preserve the product, as it's not provided in a raw form, to be used immediately, but rather processed, to allow a significant shelf-life. This is also true of human foods, as salt is a natural preservative. Now when it comes to fast food, you get into a whole other level of complexities with processing and purposes ranging from preserving, to flavoring, and so on, and it's nothing pertinent to this discusssion. Regardless however, of the added salts in the foods we feed our fish, the metabolic absorbtion of salts, and it's resulting distribution varies greatly from a fish's ability and requirement of survival to diffuse water externally by way of not only the epitheilial membrane, but through their gills as well. For freshwater fish (all fish really, but using freshwater fish as an example in this case), there is a level of salt within the body which must remain stable to ensure survival. In freshwater home environments, the fish's exposure to natural salts is pretty much non existant, and therefore, it must work that much harder to maintain it's natural levels. Added salts in foods provide replenishment which allow the body more efficient regulation and maintenance of this element, easing it's natural metabolic, cardiac and circulatory functions. (In the wild, these salts would be extracted from natural food sources, so it's addition into "synthetic" sources is vital). But having salt present in the body, does not protect against infection/infestation, and as I said, it's metabolic absorbtion varies greatly from it's external absorbtion.
Chew on this for example - If you were to eat a few table spoons of pure salt, your sodium levels would significantly rise during digestion. But if you were to swim or bathe in saltwater - would they then also rise? NO, not by any easily detectable amount, or level which might promote nevative reactions, because it is used nearly at the same rate it is absorbed, and applied to the body in different ways. (To explain this in greater detail would be exhastive and potentially confusing for other reader's, so I will leave it at that).
Adding salts to an aquarium where a fish is suffering a parasitic infestation (note that this does not apply to all parasites, but rather a select grouping), not only directly attacks the parasite in question - being that this organism lacks the ability to filter the now present salt (as a fish does), but it also stimulates the fish's biological responses to slime coat production, which is another way a fish not only protects their "skin", but cleans it as well (with the shedding of an older slime coat, removing external parasites, bacteria and fungi, as I explained in my previous post). Additionally, the added salt is a stress reducer in many situations if used correctly, and such allows for a more efficient immuno-response from the animal. Understanding the differences between external and metabolic absorbtion, and it's resulting distribution and effects is key to continue in the direction you headed in this statement, should you wish it to be accurate.
To perhaps hobbyists using salt as a tonic in there tanks in low doses which over time seems to be a host of breeding resistant types of bugs. Then that hobbyist sells or trades this fish with another hobbyist. Places this host fish into a new tank which can be infected within days or weeks. So just like in the real world we have flu resistant virus's like the h1n1 and other drugs like good ol penicillin that are not working like they used too.
Process of evolution. Whether it be caused, as you say by extended exposure to low dose treatments, resulting in a stronger resistance, or whether it be caused by exposure to a number of treatments, the end result is inevitable - parasites are some of the best survivalists, and are forever adapting. You might enjoy researching parasitology.
Common sense to me says when you go to the doctor when you are sick you get meds. If your dog or cat (or farm animal) were sick you would have a vet medicate them. So why are fish excluded?
Not necessarily. See, whereas that conclution is standard for you, many others may hold different opinions on the matter. Not everyone automatically turns to physicians and pharmaceutical remedies when ill. Sure, certain disease and conditions greatly benefit from, or might require, their eventual assistance to ensure lasting health or survival, but there is also a plethora of which do not, and where individuals opt not to treat in that manner. The same is applied to caring for animals, specifically fish, in this instance. Where some conditions greatly benefit from, or might require, treatment with commercial medications, there are many which do not, and of which their owners opt not to use, salt being one for a number of afflictions.
You would think that in this day and age, With all of the resistant pathogens like flu and ebola. That the hobbyist would apply this same vigilance to there fish instead of throwing the common aspirin (salt) at the solution at the first signs of trouble.
Vigilance, as you describe it, would mean that using anything less than a commecial product would be neglect, and in my opinion that's neither an accurate, nor fair assessment. Not to mention that using the analogy of aspirin in relation to salt use is also inaccurate, as the use of salt does not merely mask an underlying condition (as aspirin might with a headache), but rather, in many cases sucessfully combats it.
Many times these eloba (what i call them) types of diseases hit so hard and fast in the tank. That throwing salt in the mix as the 1st like of defense wastes precious time. As the hobbyists wrings his hands looking for results as the days pass by and sees no signs of relief.
Here again, I 'd have to disagree with you. If a hobbyist, using a salt treatment were to see no sign of relief in their animal, the attention would then not need to be focused on your assumed inefectiveness of the salt, but rather the animal's condition, and specific infection/infestation that was meant to be cured. Salt is not a wonder-drug, it cannot cure everything, and for many things it's use is superfluous. However, for the many situations in which it's use is commonly preferred, and advised, it has demonstrated a long line of sucessful results. If a fish were to not respond to a salt treatment, it could be because a number of things, including but not limited to; the parasite/bacteria/fungi being one of which salt cannot remedy (in which case this would be owner-error, by misdiagnosis), incorrect dosing and/or maintenance of the salt/water ratio (again, owner-error), etc. (yes there is more, such as the animal's overall health, environment, secondary infections, etc., but moving on...)
He changes his course of action on using a med but by the time the disease has taken hold and is even out of the reach of the strongest pharm grade meds. Which in the end wipes out the entire tank, I know this scenario because ive been there to many times to count.
Comprehention of not only your treatment methods - their benefits as well as risks, but also of the illness you are trying to cure - such as causes, phases and lifespan, weaknesses as well as it's effects on the fish, is imperative to making any sucessful steps towards rehabilitation. You cannot expect to defeat something of which you do not fully understand, nor can you rely upon the intervention of a treatment if you do not fully understand it's workings and limitations, in addition to the responsibilities layed upon you to execute said treatments properly. as previously mentioned, other factors play a role in its sucess or lack thereof.
And i know many breeders including one today who just emailed me. Who said this:
"Try the experiment like i did, set up two identical aquariums. Add salt to one of them, and none to the other. See how long the 3.0 sodium tank lasts before you have a major fish wipe out. I did this experiment in the salted tanks... all the fish died. These were tough African cichlids that died mind you"
So i hope this is an interesting read whether you agree or disagree with my view on salt. But i want to leave this thread as friend to everyone and especially to those who i may have upset accidentally.
Cheers,
Erik
Well no $h!t Sherlock, with a level of salinity that high, even saltwater fish would struggle beyond comprehension to acclimate sucessfully and maintain internal balance (if even possible!) General levels of specific gravity accepted in a saltwater environment range from 1.021 - 1.028 <--and that's high, and not recommended for the vast majority of species. Your "friend" suggested you try an "experiement" of 3.0!? That's not an experiment, that's an execution. Why not just put them in a jar afterward, they've already been pickled.
No offense but your friend seems like a certifiable R-tard if that's the type of advice he's dishing out.
