# Personal Bias



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

The owner of Aquaripure and I are having a personal spat.  I have called him out on the properties of his product and he has called me out to duplicate a system.

If funds weren't limited I'd take his challenge, but that is not feasible at the moment.

I could do a side by side challenge, but I would require some serious test kits. What would you guys recommend? Given a FW environment?


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

What exactly is your issue with his product?


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

solarz said:


> What exactly is your issue with his product?


Lets assume FW for a moment:
1) If you remove the nitrates from a tank you are taking away the easiest indicator of how dirty your tank is, and when it is time for a water change.

2) If you take away the nitrates you also can not know accurately if you tank is over stocked or not.

3) He claims that it reduces the need for water changes. This I don't believe is accurate because detritus will still build up in the substrate and need to be cleaned out. This equates to a water change.
3b) He claims that detritus doesn't build up in a "moderately stocked tank" (how would you know what is moderate if you can't read the bioload?) and that his filter takes care of organic AND inorganic waste. I just don't believe this to be the case. Even if it was densely populated with anaerobic bacteria I don't believe that it could handle the inorganics at all.

4) There is no mention of pH swings, because of the bicarbonate consumption by the beneficial bacteria. Water changes replaces those and other much needed nutrients in the tank.

I think it does fine as a nitrate removal system, but as for his other claims... no way. For example:



> The Aquaripure can be used with all freshwater tropical fish aquariums and saltwater aquariums including coral reef tanks and freshwater planted tanks.


Planted tanks.... really??? In good planted tanks we actually HAVE to add nitrates....

There is just so much wrong with his sales pitch and people are eating it up.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

J-P said:


> Lets assume FW for a moment:
> 1) If you remove the nitrates from a tank you are taking away the easiest indicator of how dirty your tank is, and when it is time for a water change.
> 
> 2) If you take away the nitrates you also can not know accurately if you tank is over stocked or not.
> ...


I don't think a system that removes nitrates is good for a planted tank. I don't know enough about corals to comment on that. However, I think that if you can take care of nitrates, you have removed the biggest source of pollutant in an aquarium. I'm sure his system can't take care of inorganics, but it certainly does greatly reduce the need for water changes.

Detritus build up in the substrate doesn't matter, because the detritus will eventually decompose into ammonia. Detritus in itself doesn't harm fish: river bottoms have more detritus than your aquarium ever will. It's the way the detritus affects water quality that matters, and that means decomposing into toxic ammonia.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

and thus, I would live to do a side by side comparison.

On his site, he had a nice planted tank... very nice actually, but having kept a BIG one myself.. it seems almost too good to be true.

The river analogy is a good one, but you are also talking about large bodies of water, excellent flow and are self regulating. Too much detritus (or contamination) from the source water = dead fish. In an enclosed system, that is compounded.

According to him, all that is needed is mechanical filtration and the aquaripure will handle all of the biological filtration.



> All any aquarium really needs for great water quality is good water flow, *a little mechanical filtration*, and an Aquaripure filter.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

J-P said:


> and thus, I would live to do a side by side comparison.
> 
> On his site, he had a nice planted tank... very nice actually, but having kept a BIG one myself.. it seems almost too good to be true.
> 
> ...


The water flow of the river keeps any amount of toxins dissolving into the water at a minimal concentration. That's what I was getting at. Detritus itself isn't toxic, it's the byproducts of its decomposition, namely ammonia, that is toxic.

I'm also curious what you think, aside from nitrates, are major sources of pollutants in the aquarium?


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

solarz said:


> I'm also curious what you think, aside from nitrates, are major sources of pollutants in the aquarium?


Agreed about the ammonia / detritus / bi-products.
Not major per se, like nitrates; but you also have TDS, pH and hormones that come into play. There are other factors, but that was why I posted originally. Any recommendations on test kits that go above and beyond.


----------



## 50seven (Feb 14, 2010)

Might sound like a dumb question, but have you tried his filter? Maybe he's making his claims based on his own personal experience in a number of particular systems. 

Maybe offer him to do some third party product testing if he gives you a deal on his product.

As a reefer, I'd go for a product that can keep the tank at 0 nitrates on a continual basis. Though my refugium is doing a fine job of it right now...


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Actually I do have his product... and have yet to set it up.

I purchased it for my old 500 gal planted and didn't use it because I needed the nitrate readings.

The unit I have will go on the new SW tank for nitrate removal only.

The nitrate portion of the system is something I don't have an issue with. I am certain it does a very good job at that. It is the other claims he makes "less water changes, absorbs inorganic material".. etc..

I will have to purchase a smaller unit to do a side by side... also will need a lot of test kits. 
Any recommendation on the kits? We want to be as detailed as possible.

or is that too much??? I'd be spending $$$ (hard earned at that) on a theory that (I believe) is correct. Thus the difference is knowing and believing.


----------



## 50seven (Feb 14, 2010)

The nature of marketing is to make as many good claims about your product as possible. The reason we have people like the Consumer Report magazine and such is to put the products through real life testing in an unbiased manner. Of course he's only going to put all the glowing reviews up on his website. It's when an independent source starts speaking well of the product that we know it's as good as they claim. 

Good luck with the testing...


----------

