I found out how Prime works. It’s on the back label.

Test these! Test these!

Seachem Prime
Seachem Safe
Seachem KanaPlex
Seachem Metroplex
Seachem Matrix
Seachem De*Nitrate
Seachem Stability
Seachem AmGuard
Seachem Purigen
Seachem Flourish
Seachem Flourish Excel
Seachem Pristine

Really anybody... anybody please show proof that any of the above products do what the say from and independent laboratory test, web site on the internet or even any test on the Seachem web site.

You are forwarding what is essentially a conspiracy theory in a hobby where many hobbyists regularly use these products effectively. Also there are without a doubt studies that prove things like Kanaplex are effective antibiotics, it's a generic antibiotic with a branded name. Additionally, all the fertilizers are just liquid versions of various dry ferts.

Again though.....prime does not claim to REDUCE ammonia. It doesn't call itself an ammonia reducer.

There is a big difference so I don't know why that word keeps getting used. "Temporarily detoxify" and "remove" are much different things.

A reducing agent is a term of art, it doesn't mean to literally remove, that's obviously impossible, read my above quote.

 

You are forwarding what is essentially a conspiracy theory in a hobby where many hobbyists regularly use these products effectively. Also there are without a doubt studies that prove things like Kanaplex are effective antibiotics, it's a generic antibiotic with a branded name. Additionally, all the fertilizers are just liquid versions of various dry ferts.

Yep, been going on for over 20 years too. Post those studies please. For your ferts... off the shelf stuff, ok.

Start a new thread though...

 

Test these! Test these!

Seachem Prime
Seachem Safe
Seachem KanaPlex
Seachem Metroplex
Seachem Matrix
Seachem De*Nitrate
Seachem Stability
Seachem AmGuard
Seachem Purigen
Seachem Flourish
Seachem Flourish Excel
Seachem Pristine

Really anybody... anybody please show proof that any of the above products do what the say from and independent laboratory test, web site on the internet or even any test on the Seachem web site.

I'd like to see YOUR results for testing all of these products. I intend to test the Prime myself using ammonia like suggested in your last thread but haven't yet. Looking forward to the results though.

 

Never said they were dishonest. Just want proof that what the say is true. Is that too much to ask? Again, how does Prime help in emergencies when you just have to do a 50% water change and have your filter oxidate the ammonia. You have bought into the hype.

Only in a cycled tank though. If there is enough bacteria to handle the bio-load there will be no ammonia problem and Prime will not be needed. Any of the many other water conditioners will work just fine in a fully cycled tank.

There is a big difference between a fully cycled tank and one that is still cycling. I hope you can understand and maybe even agree that there is a difference and they need to be handled differently.

 

There is a big difference between a fully cycled tank and one that is still cycling. I hope you can understand and maybe even agree that there is a difference and they need to be handled differently.

I agree. We are not taking about cycling tanks.

 

Have you done any real tests yourself ? There's nothing wrong with questioning the authenticity of seachem, but you must also hold the same standard towards those articles you claim back your hypothesis about seachem.

 

Have you done any real tests yourself ? There's nothing wrong with questioning the authenticity of seachem, but you must also hold the same standard towards those articles you claim back your hypothesis about seachem.

Test have already been done. I'm not doing them again when the results are in. All in previous posts.

EDIT - Sorry I did not do these tests. I meant to say that I was not going to post the results again as the have already been posted. Sorry.

 

Test have already been done. I'm not doing them again when the results are in. All in previous posts.

Yeah I read the last thread and article. You're just choosing to support the side that fits your narrative. What makes that specific test authentic? It was just an article with claims of what a test showed, it didnt even have a video showing the test being done.

 

I agree. We are not taking about cycling tanks.

Also not talking about doing water changes with tap that contains ammonia. right? Lol

 

Also not talking about doing water changes with tap that contains ammonia. right? Lol

Of course, yes.

 

Yeah I read the last thread and article. You're just choosing to support the side that fits your narrative. What makes that specific test authentic? It was just an article with claims of what a test showed, it didnt even have a video showing the test being done.

I agree. We have to question the ones doing the testing as much as we question the product they are testing. We can't know what they are out to prove or disprove. We can't know if they went into the test with a foregone conclusion and then do their best to make sure the tests show what they thought to begin with. We all need to go into things with an open mind and let the chips fall where they may.

this pertains to more than just the product we are discussing.

 

Test have already been done. I'm not doing them again when the results are in. All in previous posts.

Are they YOUR results or just the ones you've been quoting? Again, I'd like to see YOURS and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Kind of easy just saying "nah it's been done, I don't have to myself.."

Seriously, make a video or something of you doing those tests and open up the comments for debate or just let people have their own experience. It either works or it doesn't, why try to argue with those who are seeing results? Just seems like your trying to bash Seachem without your own personal proof.

 

This dude really asking me to prove that fertilizer works.

 

Are they YOUR results or just the ones you've been quoting? Again, I'd like to see YOURS and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Kind of easy just saying "nah it's been done, I don't have to myself.."

Seriously, make a video or something of you doing those tests and open up the comments for debate or just let people have their own experience. It either works or it doesn't, why try to argue with those who are seeing results? Just seems like your trying to bash Seachem without your own personal proof.

Ah, sorry. I did not perform any test. I will correct that above. They have already been done and those results have been posted. Even had one of our own folks here try to show how Prime worked. Unfortunately they failed and showed the exact same amount of ammonia after dosing with Prime. Again, just look it up.

 

Detoxification, as I understand it, temporarily changes the chemical composition of ammonia and nitrite molecules to a form that's less harmful to fish. Either by "binding" molecules of ammonia and nitrite to whatever is in prime, which is unstable and can't permanently stay in this state, or possibly by reducing ammonia and nitrite to harmless nitrogen gas or a non-toxic organic nitrogen compound, which would be permanent but still appear temporary because more ammonia is constantly being introduced to a tank. Obviously in neither scenario is it okay to add large volumes of prime without ever changing water, as it's a temporary solution that can be toxic in high concentrations.

Your claim that all conditioners have this property is clearly false, every conditioner would say it detoxifies ammonia if that was the case in order to sell better.

I don't really know why you made a post titled like a clickbait article because you finally read the back of the prime bottle. I doubt this is some grand conspiracy.

I was going to stay out of this one, but I just can't.

I believe that you are trying to defend the claims of Prime. You just wrote a rambling series of guesses and assumptions. Why on earth would anyone agree with this? You literally didn't provide any coherent information or even a slightly convincing argument.

I'd like to see YOUR results for testing all of these products. I intend to test the Prime myself using ammonia like suggested in your last thread but haven't yet. Looking forward to the results though.

Once again, the person trying to take people's money need to prove it! By the way, I offer free wallet inspections, let me know if you are interested.

A fool and his money are soon parted

 

Ah, sorry. I did not perform any test. I will correct that above. They have already been done and those results have been posted. Even had one of our own folks here try to show how Prime worked. Unfortunately they failed and showed the exact same amount of ammonia after dosing with Prime. Again, just look it up.

I think you misunderstand what I meant. I know you haven't performed any tests, I'm suggesting you do. Looking up those results is not relevant if I intend to do the test for myself as I believe you should. Obviously there's people out there that use it and have results just as I'm sure there are those who do not see any. I think the best way is to see for yourself.

I was going to stay out of this one, but I just can't.

Feel you on that..

 

Are they YOUR results or just the ones you've been quoting? Again, I'd like to see YOURS and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Kind of easy just saying "nah it's been done, I don't have to myself.."

Seriously, make a video or something of you doing those tests and open up the comments for debate or just let people have their own experience. It either works or it doesn't, why try to argue with those who are seeing results? Just seems like your trying to bash Seachem without your own personal proof.

Why on earth wouldn't the company that makes the products produce video that show proof of efficacy?????? There is literally only one conceivable answer - they can't prove anything.

 

I think you misunderstand what I meant. I know you haven't performed any tests, I'm suggesting you do. Looking up those results is not relevant if I intend to do the test for myself as I believe you should. Obviously there's people out there that use it and have results just as I'm sure there are those who do not see any. I think the best way is to see for yourself.

Please explain your full test parameters including all equipment, tools, chemicals in detail please. Make sure you explain what you think needs to be proven, how to go about proving that information, expected results both pro and con. Please include all cost so we can budget for this. <rant over>

Sorry, again, it's already been done and proved.

 

Once again, the person trying to take people's money need to prove it! By the way, I offer free wallet inspections, let me know if you are interested.

A fool and his money are soon parted

Why on earth wouldn't the company that makes the products produce video that show proof of efficacy?????? There is literally only one conceivable answer - they can't prove anything.

I won't argue that the company should back up their claims but it still seems to me OP is arguing even their proof just because other results show something different. Don't be mistaken, I am not trying to defend them but if you doubt a product then test it for yourself before you make claims like this. Like I said, I intend to try it just to see for myself and I'd be glad to post my results. Anyone invested in this debate should do the same.

 

Why on earth wouldn't the company that makes the products produce video that show proof of efficacy?????? There is literally only one conceivable answer - they can't prove anything.

There are multiple companies that sell similar ammonia "reducing" products that bind something to the NH3 molecule to make it less toxic, and larger hence why prime makes tanks cycle a bit slower because the bacteria has to break down a larger more complicated molecule. You can find API's patents online, although it doesn't really divulge any trade secrets. Are you asserting that there is a grand conspiracy by aquarium companies to sell some inert substance and claim it reduces ammonia? Even if it's impossible to know how it works fish keepers use prime to great effect on a regular basis.
Because prime is a trade secret for Seachem it's impossible to figure out how it works beyond their rare explanation of ammonia-reducing substances creating some sort of temporary inert "salt". We can only verify that it does works through use in aquariums, and from my experience it works well.

 

The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century. It involves careful observation, applying rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions can distort how one interprets the observation. It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such observations; experimental and measurement-based testing of deductionsdrawn from the hypotheses; and refinement (or elimination) of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings. These are principles of the scientific method, as distinguished from a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.

Scientific method - Wikipedia

 

I won't argue that the company should back up their claims but it still seems to me OP is arguing even their proof just because other results show something different.

You don't understand. Seachem can not prove anything!

 

Please explain your full test parameters including all equipment, tools, chemicals in detail please. Make sure you explain what you think needs to be proven, how to go about proving that information, expected results both pro and con. Please include all cost so we can budget for this. <rant over>

Sorry, again, it's already been done and proved.

Sure bud, looking forward to your results too! Very curious to compare.

You don't understand. Seachem can not prove anything!

I understand that you're arguing with a company that you yourself have yet to disprove with your own results. Site all you want, just try it for yourself and put it to rest.

 

There are multiple companies that sell similar ammonia "reducing" products that bind something to the NH3 molecule to make it less toxic, and larger hence why prime makes tanks cycle a bit slower because the bacteria has to break down a larger more complicated molecule. You can find API's patents online, although it doesn't really divulge any trade secrets. Are you asserting that there is a grand conspiracy by aquarium companies to sell some inert substance and claim it reduces ammonia? Even if it's impossible to know how it works fish keepers use prime to great effect on a regular basis.
Because prime is a trade secret for Seachem it's impossible to figure out how it works beyond their rare explanation of ammonia-reducing substances creating some sort of temporary inert "salt". We can only verify that it does works through use in aquariums, and from my experience it works well.

No, you literally can't verify that it does work - you can only speculate. This is why the scientific field exists...to verify things....with science.

Again, where is this information coming from? "...hence why prime makes tanks cycle a bit slower..."

Honestly, where are you getting this from?

 

Ah, sorry. I did not perform any test. I will correct that above. They have already been done and those results have been posted. Even had one of our own folks here try to show how Prime worked. Unfortunately they failed and showed the exact same amount of ammonia after dosing with Prime. Again, just look it up.

One last word if I may. Yes, it will show the exact same amount of ammonia when using the API liquid test kit. The API test can't tell the difference between ammonia detoxed with Prime and free ammonia. Again, Prime DOES NOT REMOVE the ammonia. It doesn't claim to remove the ammonia. If there is ammonia in the tank it will show up whether treated with Prime or not

This same person ran the test with the ammonia alert that one sticks inside the tank. She added ammonia. The alert showed ammonia but once prime was added the alert changed to safe. Really how much more proof than that does one need, to understand what is happening.

 

The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century. It involves careful observation, applying rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions can distort how one interprets the observation. It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such observations; experimental and measurement-based testing of deductionsdrawn from the hypotheses; and refinement (or elimination) of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings. These are principles of the scientific method, as distinguished from a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.

Scientific method - Wikipedia

Yes we all took 6th grade science class good job.

Do you believe in modern medicine? Most drugs released now are patented and how they are made and how exactly they function aren't disclosed to the public.

The only two things Ive been trying to argue are 1) prime has worked for me, and 2) the back of the bottle doesn't prove that it's exactly the same as regular conditioner that just reacts with chlorine and chloramine.

No, you literally can't verify that it does work - you can only speculate. This is why the scientific field exists...to verify things....with science.

Again, where is this information coming from? "...hence why prime makes tanks cycle a bit slower..."

Honestly, where are you getting this from?

I'm sorry, do you rigorously test all the chemicals you use in a tank with lab equipment? No, you don't. You use what has worked from experience or recommendation. I'm not saying that prime is some alternative to cycling, only that it's more than a bare-bones water conditioner.

 

Yes we all took 6th grade science class good job.

Do you believe in modern medicine? Most drugs released now are patented and how they are made and how exactly they function aren't disclosed to the public.

The only two things Ive been trying to argue are 1) prime has worked for me, and 2) the back of the bottle doesn't prove that it's exactly the same as regular conditioner that just reacts with chlorine and chloramine.

You mean medicine based on science?

A pharmaceutical company seeking FDA approval to sell a new prescription drug must complete a five-step process: discovery/concept, preclinical research, clinical research, FDA review and FDA post-market safety monitoring. - FDA Approval - Process of Approving Drugs & Medical Devices

I am on the side of science. In my opinion, your burden of proof is much more aligned with the world of naturopaths and antI vaxxers.

 

You want the five-step process that Seachem(or any other manufacturer of similar products) needs to follow?

1. Develop new name for product
2. Make unproven claims
3. Print claim on bottle
4. Ship to distributors
5. Take the cheque to the bank

 

I have become very biased over the past 8 or so years from reading agenda based "scientific studies" on another subject. You really can't believe every thing folks like that promote. It makes me leery of most scientific studies. Are the studies designed to prove a preconceived idea? We can't answer that question so in most cases I can't base what I believe on their conclusions

 

You do realize that no company is going to pay thousands of dollars to prove their product works when it doesn't affect their bottom line. If there is evidence, then people should post full results and video evidence and also show how their test can be replicated proving seachem wrong. If that was the case and it exposed them causing a large money loss, then seachem would have to come out and prove it does work. The burden off proof lies on the people claiming it doesn't work. I don't give a darn about seachem, I just like evidence. If someone has an intellectually honest test that can be replicated showing it doesn't work I would happily agree with them.

 

It's clear this isn't going to be settled without more experiments, preferably done on video.

Daphnia are used for aquatic toxicity studies all the time and I won't feel as bad risking their lives vs. fish.

I'll buy a bunch sometime later this year and grow a colony then randomly assign them to groups that will receive:

• 5X dosage Prime
• 1 mg/L ammonia
• 1 mg/L ammonia + 5X dosage Prime

Should Prime be 5X dosed for ammonia or just nitrite/nitrate?

Different products and ammonia levels will be tested depending on the results of previous experiments.

Repeat for nitrite and nitrate.

 

I am on the side of science. In my opinion, your burden of proof is much more aligned with the world of naturopaths and antI vaxxers.

Curious, have you yourself eliminated or refined the hypothesis that Prime does or does not do what it claims through your own results? Because if you truly are on the side of science then you'd have no problem doing the test for yourself and sharing if you haven't already.

I DO NOT care who is proven right or wrong, I simply want everyone to see for themselves. I don't think anyone has room to talk on either behalf until they've done so.

 

I have become very biased over the past 8 or so years from reading agenda based "scientific studies" on another subject. You really can't believe every thing folks like that promote. It makes me leery of most scientific studies. Are the studies designed to prove a preconceived idea? We can't answer that question so in most cases I can't base what I believe on their conclusions

CrossFit?

 

You do realize that no company is going to pay thousands of dollars to prove their product works when it doesn't affect their bottom line. If there is evidence, then people should post full results and video evidence and also show how their test can be replicated proving seachem wrong. If that was the case and it exposed them causing a large money loss, then seachem would have to come out and prove it does work. The burden off proof lies on the people claiming it doesn't work. I don't give a darn about seachem, I just like evidence. If someone has an intellectually honest test that can be replicated showing it doesn't work I would happily agree with them.

Thank you! I was in the process of typing when you posted but well said. I'm indifferent but everyone needs to have their own personal experience. If my results prove against Seachem I'll happily share them in agreement, same goes for the opposite.

 

You do realize that no company is going to pay thousands of dollars to prove their product works when it doesn't affect their bottom line. If there is evidence, then people should post full results and video evidence and also show how their test can be replicated proving seachem wrong. If that was the case and it exposed them causing a large money loss, then seachem would have to come out and prove it does work. The burden off proof lies on the people claiming it doesn't work. I don't give a darn about seachem, I just like evidence. If someone has an intellectually honest test that can be replicated showing it doesn't work I would happily agree with them.

Wait a minute, are you trying to say that they haven't performed research? Then how do they know it works?

You have this so fundamentally backwards, that I don't even know where to start. Imagine your response to these scenarios

1. Your bank tells you that if you buy mutual fund X, you can expect 1000% return on your investment.
2. A vendor at a farmers' market sells you a goose that he swears will lay golden eggs
3. A nutrition store sells you a supplement that claims to make you run 100% faster
4. A homeopath offers to "treat a four-year-old's aggression problems with a homeopathic remedy made from rabid dog saliva." - that one is real

The burden of proof lies with the person/company making the claims.

 

CrossFit?

Not that one.

It's clear this isn't going to be settled without more experiments, preferably done on video.

Daphnia are used for aquatic toxicity studies all the time and I won't feel as bad risking their lives vs. fish.

I'll buy a bunch sometime later this year and grow a colony then randomly assign them to groups that will receive:

• 5X dosage Prime
• 1 mg/L ammonia
• 1 mg/L ammonia + 5X dosage Prime

Should Prime be 5X dosed for ammonia or just nitrite/nitrate?

Different products and ammonia levels will be tested depending on the results of previous experiments.

Repeat for nitrite and nitrate.

I am curious as to why you would run the test by dosing 5 times the normal amount needed to detox ammonia. I do know the instructions say it is safe to add that much but it doesn't say to use that much under everyday normal circumstances. Maybe to disprove the nitrite claims?

 

Wait a minute, are you trying to say that they haven't performed research? Then how do they know it works?

You have this so fundamentally backwards, that I don't even know where to start. Imagine your response to these scenarios

1. Your bank tells you that if you buy mutual fund X, you can expect 1000% return on your investment.
2. A vendor at a farmers' market sells you a goose that he swears will lay golden eggs
3. A nutrition store sells you a supplement that claims to make you run 100% faster
4. A homeopath offers to "treat a four-year-old's aggression problems with a homeopathic remedy made from rabid dog saliva." - that one is real

Stop being absurd. All they are saying is to back up your claims with your own results. I'd be willing to bet Seachem tested things a bit more in depth then you have.

 

Stop being absurd. All they are saying is to back up your claims with your own results. I'd be willing to bet Seachem tested things a bit more in depth then you have.

Cichlidude contacted Seachem and they stated that they are unable to provide any information that would support any of their claims. Now you can go ahead and say that information is a "trade secret" and "highly classified", but that information would not require them to disclose any chemical formulations. But hey, i'm sure you can find another justification as to why they wouldn't provide any data.

 

Wait a minute, are you trying to say that they haven't performed research? Then how do they know it works?

You have this so fundamentally backwards, that I don't even know where to start. Imagine your response to these scenarios

1. Your bank tells you that if you buy mutual fund X, you can expect 1000% return on your investment.
2. A vendor at a farmers' market sells you a goose that he swears will lay golden eggs
3. A nutrition store sells you a supplement that claims to make you run 100% faster
4. A homeopath offers to "treat a four-year-old's aggression problems with a homeopathic remedy made from rabid dog saliva." - that one is real

The burden of proof lies with the person/company making the claims.

Of course they performed research. I'm telling you how it works, not how it ideally should go. I think it would be wonderful if they showed their evidence. I'm just telling you it's not going to happen because they have built a brand people trust. They could be lying, but they're not losing any money so why would they go out of their way to entertain a few ney sayers? They've built a large brand around a name people trust. Ergo, if you want to prove them to be liars the burden of proof is on you. If anyone truly has this bomb shell evidence they should put it out there in it's entirety.

 

Of course they performed research. I'm telling you how it works, not how it ideally should go. I think it would be wonderful if they showed their evidence. I'm just telling you it's not going to happen because they have built a brand people trust. They could be lying, but they're not losing any money so why would they go out of their way to entertain a few ney sayers? They've built a large brand around a name people trust. Ergo, if you want to prove them to be liars the burden of proof is on you. If anyone truly has this bomb shell evidence they should put it out there in it's entirety.

That's purely conjecture. You can't make any definitive statement about how much people trust Seachem. Some people do trust them and some people don't. You have no idea whether or not the company would be more or less successful based upon publishing their results.

I tend to believe they would sell significantly more product if they proved their claims. I would be buying every Seachem product if they all performed as claimed.

Again, I don't hate Seachem. I use Prime as my water conditioner, I have a Tidal 110, and I use Purigen(I really don't think it does anything though).