Fishkeeping is not an exact science and if another fishkeeper can use the chlorine or chloramine to their advantage to treat a fish, then I say more power to them.
I haven't commented on their use as fish treatments,only whether their presence is beneficial or not after a water change.
I never learn much when I have a closed mind, which is why I keep it open as much as I can. You should try it sometime.
Far from it.Take this thread.Before I joined it,I didn't know that much about chlorine and chloramines or their effects.The vast majority of information advocates their removal.Then ,inevitably with this hobby,a contradiction occurs.When this happens I cannot help but learn more in order to resolve it.There is always a logical way past it.
The way I see it....Is there a benefit to having them present?The only benefit offered is that they reduce pathogens.But this comes at cost. It
is toxic ,therefore, by it's very nature, it must have a detrimental effect on fish.Add to this the fact that you reduce pathogens just by doing a water change any way, you're essentially achieving the same result without any chlorine/chloramines present.So there is no real benefit.Therefore the
logical conclusion would be to remove it.
I am not the one that needs to keep my mind open.It's the people that carry on doing what they are doing just because they or someone else has alway done it etc. without questioning why contradictions in practices occur.Be aware that a
contradiction in practices is not merely a different way of doing the same thing,they are practices that fly in the face of each other.Is it safe?Isn't it safe?It can't be both.
Fortunately I have always dechlorinated.Were I on the other side of the fence,I would have readily converted based on this more thorough understanding.
My original post was just a joke anyway and hardly a butt kiss since I don't even know who Tolak is....... It wasn't meant to be as harsh as you took it.
My reply was only intended as abit of banter.No offense meant nor none taken.
Then do as you do. I explained why I do things as I do, and I do not believe that I m doing anything wrong.
Why would you?After all you've always done it that way and so have many other people, therefore it
has to be the best way.
Right?
And I really hope you don't kiss your mom with that mouth. This is a family friendly forum, can we keep it that way?
Who's on their high horse?
We drink chlorinate water, though the chlorine levels in tap water are often really really low, if it posed a serious risk to the fish I'm sure you would not want to drink it...
Take a look at the various studies online regards chlorinated water and you would probably think twice about drinking it.
You talk about optimal methods and optimal results, but what is the optimal result? What if not everyone agrees on this optimal result. Perhaps what is an optimal result for you is not an optimal result for me. Thus we are back at the point where there are many different ways to keep a successful/optimal and happy tank.
Eh?
Surely the
optimal result for any caring fish keeper would be to provide the most favourable enviroment in which the fish live.I cannot think of any result which would surpass this.Can you?
The only certain way of achieving an optimal result would be by using optimal practices.This is not the same as using practices that are the best available where restrictive criteria dictate the available choices.Rather, to be described as optimal,there can be no restrictions,
all choices should be available and then the most favourable selected.
I have not once disputed that different methods can be used to keep a
successful system.But a successful system does not automatically equate to an optimal system.Although an optimal system would, however, be successful by default.
I in know way claim to be running an optimal system.But I do feel it is attainable.