• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up
  • You can now follow UKAPS on Instagram.

What's in AE excel/easycarbo

Status
Not open for further replies.

JamesC

Member
Thread starter
Joined
3 Jul 2007
Messages
1,273
Location
Bexley, Kent
Sye Davies said:
Thank you. As I suspected it is quite acidic. I would guess the art of storing it successfully is in the buffer used to keep it at the correct pH.

James
 

GreenNeedle

Member
Joined
19 Jul 2007
Messages
2,727
Location
Lincoln UK
JamesC said:
Terrible stuff. What on earth do you want it for? Are you embalming bodies? :wideyed:

I used it for the parasite/bacterial/fungal problems I had with the Corys. Frank off Planet Catfish suggested it. He uses it weekly in his tanks. Apparently it turns the dead cells into something else like in embalming and removes the dead cell food source from the equation so that the parasites have nothing to feed off. Used to cure Ich etc. Also kills the fungus, bacteria and it's spores.

Didn't kill anything fish or shrimp wise but it does smell. Didn't smell it in the water but when the bottle is open you can smell it.

I bought a 500ml bottle off ebay direct from the manufacturer/supplier. Clearly labelled as to what it was, clear toxicity statements on the advert and the bottle. They've been selling it for years. Was cheap too

AC
 

plantbrain

Expert
Joined
2 Aug 2007
Messages
1,938
hijac said:
plantbrain said:
Not with these products if you follow directions, the beer is likely more risk to life and limb;)

I'm holding a bottle of beer in one hand and a bottle of easy carbo in the other.

Living on the edge. 8)

edit - obviously put them down to type.

My client once drank some Excel he had in a glass similar to the water.
Said it burned like hell.
Sounds like high proof Scotch to me:)

He's still quite alive.
I've only done something similar with Brine shrimp. :oops:

Regards,
Tom Barr
 

JamesM

Member
Joined
17 Apr 2008
Messages
1,903
Location
The BIG End, South Wales
plantbrain said:
hijac said:
plantbrain said:
Not with these products if you follow directions, the beer is likely more risk to life and limb;)

I'm holding a bottle of beer in one hand and a bottle of easy carbo in the other.

Living on the edge. 8)

edit - obviously put them down to type.

My client once drank some Excel he had in a glass similar to the water.
Said it burned like hell.
Sounds like high proof Scotch to me:)

He's still quite alive.
I've only done something similar with Brine shrimp. :oops:

Regards,
Tom Barr
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

plantbrain

Expert
Joined
2 Aug 2007
Messages
1,938
Why did I select AE product because its the strongest of the 3 on the market in terms of concentration and several questions surrounding the product many of straight forward were ignored.

No, EasyCarbo is ....compared to say Seachem Excel

http://www.easylife.nl/english/index.html?id=43

The dosage is much less and the results are the same, now ask yourself why?
Because the product is more concentrated.

I do not know what concentration AE's is or is not, but I doubt it's that much different than Seachem. Might be closer to Easycarbo, not sure. However, of the 2 name brands, Easy Carbo is certainly more concentrated.
You can test that while you are at it :idea:

Why ask others to do the work for you? This is something you need to prove to yourself.
You cannot trust the government, the industry etc, you said so yourself with cig's and cancer etc........
You cannot add much more as far as ppm's to the aquarium without killing things.
So they all have the same stuff, which has a known toxicity dose response curve for a wide range of aquatic critters.
This means they ultimately all have a similar dose, regardless of what the product starting ppm's are.

If I add 1ml of 100ppm NO3, or 5 ml of 20ppm, to a 10 liter tank, I get the same concentration.
Same thing here.

My question is why are you after the little guy here vs Seachem or Easylife?
It's easier to pick on them than going after the bigger companies?

I'm not questioning the fact that it's a dangerous chemical, it is, and maybe it's not safe under the guidelines for air quality exposure for humans. No one has tested that :idea:

I also feel that its likely that a major company will have developed quality control tests both during and post production to ensure there is just the right amount in the concentrated form .

To use the very same argument you used on me:
Like Westinghouse did with PCB's? Or DDT?
Cig's and cancer?
You try and use this same argument against me, then you leave your self open like this? :rolleyes:

Just because it's marketed, does not mean it's safe, things have become better over the years, but this is not food, herbicides, asbestos, DDT, or drugs, it's fish hobby stuff. Not much demand for such regulation or large risk posed to the public for most things. Big difference when comparing and making analogies.

Name one product that poses a large risk to aquarist that's been banned ?
I cannot think of any off the top of my head. AE could easily test and measure the chemical and offer the same concentration and dose to aquarists.
That's also very likely, more likely than air qualify risk assessments done on the vapours' effect on humans from use of these products :idea: .

one specific to the registered manufacturer wasnt available as per the law in the UK and Europe for AES product which is not the same in makeup as excel. so ..

How do you know it's not the same?
You'd have to same beef with Easy carb and with Seachem Excel, yet you seem unwilling to to take them on, threaten them, but are okay with a little small company?
Do entertain me.

They all have the same stuff in them, perhaps at different concentrations, but the same none the less.
Maybe the air levels are unsafe, would you go after the larger companies then? Or just AE?

We do not know.
I have tested 2 of the products for concentrations.
Have you?

In any case as i pointed out , theres just enough anecdotal evidence to me personally not to use it and I guess thats what it comes down to.

Yes, I'd suggest you not use any of the 3 products since it's a risk you are not willing to accept.
The air quality issue has not been tested or resolved within the health industry for many cases.
I highly doubt anyone has done so in the aquarium hobby :idea:

You honestly think they have?
Ask and see for yourself.

" Furthermore, it is important to note that individuals can protect themselves from exposure to glutaraldehyde by following specific guidelines outlined by the Center for Disease Control, which includes the use of local exhaust ventilation, keeping glutaraldehyde baths under a fume hood where possible, using the minimum amount of glutaraldehyde to perform the required procedure, avoiding skin contact by using gloves and aprons made of nitrile or butyl rubber, washing gloved hands after handling glutaraldehyde, wearing goggles and face shields when handling glutaraldehyde, and sealing or covering all containers holding glutaraldehyde solutions "

And this is why I tell folks not to DIY this stuff.
I have such protocols in place, few if any hobbyist do.
It can cause permanent eye damage.
You are missing some of the biological factor however, plants and bacteria break it down.
Rather fast at that.

At lower levels of concentrations, the volatility is lower(eg in your aquarium), so there's going to be less evolution in the vapour form, whether or not you can smell it, does not imply that there's a high level etc, good ventilation is wise anyway if you use it daily etc. You'd need to measure the vapours from a typical aquarium in a typical room's air to judge whether there's a health risk.
My bet is that there is some.

I don't use it frequently however, and add it before I leave for work etc. By the time I get back(9 1/2 hours later), 95-100% is gone(I took samples, frozen them to see, then tested).

This does not measure what is in the air where I am at in the home however.
Since you bring this up and all, do you think Seachem, Easy Carbo have bothered to do such human health risk assessments and do you think they have any medical human health doctors that are qualified to do such work?
You seem to think/suggest they do and should be trusted, while AE is not. I agree there's a lack of info on the human health aspects. Your sister will not be able to answer that, you need to measure the air concentrations at the homes of aquarist to get an idea there.

So you'd need a meter to measure the levels with typical use in a poorly ventilated room, at high concentrations, perhaps with several tanks etc. Then see what the ppm standards are and time of exposure/dose for humans based on the best data available for risk.

Maybe there's something to it.
Are you going to do that and take on Seachem and Easylife or just pick on AE?
*If not, then everything you have said is sort of mute ain't it?*
If so, then we can look towards having these products removed potentially and NO LONGER AVAILABLE.

While we might not want that in some ways, it may be better in the long run, however, at this point, it's all still speculation. There's no evidence I'm aware of either way on the amount of evolution into the air of any of these 3 products and their adverse health risk on aquarist.

I do wonder why you pick on AE, yet not the others, since the real risk is the ppm's in the air and the human effects and risk. All 3 companies have the same active ingredient after all and the dose to the aquariums will be similar, thus the evolution of vapour into the air where the aquarist live.



Regards,
Tom Barr
 

plantbrain

Expert
Joined
2 Aug 2007
Messages
1,938
The other thing, why not just side step it and use CO2 gas?
That's what I do. ;)

You can add CO2 to beer too!
Cannot do that for with Excel!

regards,
Tom Barr
 

davidcmadrid

Member
Joined
21 Jun 2009
Messages
115
plantbrain said:
The other thing, why not just side step it and use CO2 gas?
That's what I do. ;)

You can add CO2 to beer too!
Cannot do that for with Excel!

regards,
Tom Barr

Tom,

I am not using any product ( any more but tried two of them ) but as i said above I would tend to trust a major firm making this stuff to a precise solution more than an "online aquarium shop " and that is a sentiment many people expressed to me in private in addition. I would imagine that Excels laboratory and quality control capacity at a minimum is better, that is conjecture however but i dont think a reach . . I did ask AE , given it is not a chemicals company what its quality control was in addition to other items to which they were legally obliged to respond and didnt. Were the product manufactured by a qualified chemist im sure my questions would be answered , im not sure if your from the US or UK , i think its the US but the law is a little less lax here. Also AEs product by design is the strongest of the three. That is why i focus on AE in particular when talking about a manufacturer but most of my posts relate to the chemical itself. I had a really good experience shopping with them and everything else was fine , you will note I actually complimented the service in their section and was a little bit dissapointed that the questions were not answered.

For two aquariums i just finished rigging up 5kg bottles to the last one today and the bits for a third one are on the way.
 

JamesM

Member
Joined
17 Apr 2008
Messages
1,903
Location
The BIG End, South Wales
In what way are AE legal obliged to answer any questions? Also, what makes you think AE are making this stuff up in a bath tub? They could very well have a different company making and bottling it for them.
 

davidcmadrid

Member
Joined
21 Jun 2009
Messages
115
JamesM said:
In what way are AE legal obliged to answer any questions? Also, what makes you think AE are making this stuff up in a bath tub? They could very well have a different company making and bottling it for them.

Uk and European law states that if a chemical is a known toxin / hazard then its provider must make available an MSDS outlining the contents you can get the details of anything e.g washing up liquid , washing powder etc. This is so if there is a medical emergency with the product e.g kid drinks it the doctors know what to do... inducing vomiting after drinking Gluteraldyde is a no no , where as that is one common way of immediately stopping the toxin being further absorbed such as with bleach. The reason the MSDS should be available for the product is because it is by the name of the product as per the bottle that the doctor can identify what it is that is for example ingested.

If it was somebody else making it they could have just said so or something. In any case its not about AE only but Seachem do have one published, would you remember in A and E to say i think its the same as a product called Excel treat for that one.
 

davidcmadrid

Member
Joined
21 Jun 2009
Messages
115
plantbrain said:
Why did I select AE product because its the strongest of the 3 on the market in terms of concentration and several questions surrounding the product many of straight forward were ignored


No, EasyCarbo is ....compared to say Seachem Excel

AEtold me theres was when i bought it.



plantbrain said:
I do not know what concentration AE's is or is not, but I doubt it's that much different than Seachem. Might be closer to Easycarbo, not sure. However, of the 2 name brands, Easy Carbo is certainly more concentrated.
You can test that while you are at it :idea:

Why ask others to do the work for you? This is something you need to prove to yourself.
You cannot trust the government, the industry etc, you said so yourself with cig's and cancer etc........
You cannot add much more as far as ppm's to the aquarium without killing things.

Funny in tiny doses it kills plants and fish, at the same or lower air dose people get asthma and according to its msds other things are possible. Nurses won claims for other things too... and your mate drinks it and lives to tell the tale anyhow.. You also mentioned in an earlier post you know the exact contents and somebody just buzzed me to tell me why.I have taken no action beyond posting what i have found out here.



plantbrain said:
My question is why are you after the little guy here vs Seachem or Easylife?
It's easier to pick on them than going after the bigger companies?
This isnt anything to do with AE at the end of the day , its to do with the product all three companies sell.

plantbrain said:
I'm not questioning the fact that it's a dangerous chemical, it is, and maybe it's not safe under the guidelines for air quality exposure for humans. No one has tested that
Yes they have , the Royal College of nurses did its in the report above.




plantbrain said:
Just because it's marketed, does not mean it's safe, things have become better over the years, but this is not food, herbicides, asbestos, DDT, or drugs, it's fish hobby stuff. Not much demand for such regulation or large risk posed to the public for most things. Big difference when comparing and making analogies.

You have just made my point , which is that people should consider whether Gluteraldehyde products are safe given the stack of evidence thats available. One of the scientists on the thread said if he had kids at home he would probably not have it in the house.


plantbrain said:
Name one product that poses a large risk to aquarist that's been banned ? Is it regulated properly I cannot think of any off the top of my head. AE could easily test and measure the chemical and offer the same concentration and dose to aquarists.

Is it regulated properly ,, you said that not me . My purpose is to have people consider the information presented in the thread and make up their own mind about whether to use the product , precautions etc. I asked AE if they do QC and was ignored. It seams also that JAmes can extrapulate that Seachem are telling porkies also about the product, so maybe they too should get an " x " . That has just occurred to me , i was assuming incorrectly you might say that a multinational has a lab to do these tests in terms of the concentration.






plantbrain said:
How do you know it's not the same?
You'd have to same beef with Easy carb and with Seachem Excel, yet you seem unwilling to to take them on, threaten them, but are okay with a little small company?
Do entertain me.

They all have the same stuff in them, perhaps at different concentrations, but the same none the less.

It doesnt matter whether its the same or not , the fact is the law says they must have one and they dont for emergency purposes . I have not threatened anybody incidentally , perhaps some people feel threatened ,, you come across rather defensive. I also sent a link of this thread to Seachem and easylife.




plantbrain said:
Maybe the air levels are unsafe

Yes maybe they are , again that is my point made for me and what people should consider with all products , e.g the fella who posted that his tank sits on his home office desk.

plantbrain said:
We do not know.
I have tested 2 of the products for concentrations.
Have you?

Above you just said you didnt know what they were , but i doubt you going to tell me theres bugger all gluteralaldehyde in a product that if double dosed kills fish and sometimes kills them anyway. Has known algae killing properties at 5ppm, so by extrapolation based on dosing etc it can be done.

plantbrain said:
In any case as i pointed out , theres just enough anecdotal evidence to me personally not to use it and I guess thats what it comes down to.

plantbrain said:
Yes, I'd suggest you not use any of the 3 products since it's a risk you are not willing to accept.

If thats not abundantly clear I am not using any of them and have not done since I read the RCN report then im not using any of them with CO2 only.

The air quality issue has not been tested or resolved within the health industry for many cases.
I highly doubt anyone has done so in the aquarium hobby

You honestly think they have?
Ask and see for yourself.

I read the RCN report as saying they were unable to determine if below .2 ppm was actually safe and there strong reccomendation the industry was to eliminate Gluteraldehyde from their process which was resisted by the health industry for a long time because of cost . It is felt that the only place now using GA for sterilization is in the third world.

At lower levels of concentrations, the volatility is lower(eg in your aquarium), so there's going to be less evolution in the vapour form, whether or not you can smell it, does not imply that there's a high level etc

This is the subject of debate it appears with most studies suggesting 4ppm being the threshold for smelling it whereas one suggest 4 ppb that i found so the act of smelling it in itself may be an indication of airborne concentration . The fact that I can smell it in the next room .. etc.. With one of the manufactures products it was not the case that it was barely detectable either it was strong.

plantbrain said:
Good ventilation is wise anyway if you use it daily etc.

Great were making progress Tom. You said last night dont smell it , dont leave the bottle open and now you say good ventilation is wise. People will surely listen to you as i gather you are highly respected ( I am a paying member on your site so i have the time ), one of the things i said some post ago was to at least include some form of documentation with it.
You'd need to measure the vapours from a typical aquarium in a typical room's air to judge whether there's a health risk. My bet is that there is some.

Thanks , thats what i have been driving at that there may be a health risk.

plantbrain said:
I don't use it frequently however, and add it before I leave for work etc. By the time I get back(9 1/2 hours later), 95-100% is gone(I took samples, frozen them to see, then tested).
Since you bring this up and all, do you think Seachem, Easy Carbo have bothered to do such human health risk assessments and do you think they have any medical human health doctors that are qualified to do such work?

Potentially not , which is why the discussion is valid.

plantbrain said:
You seem to think/suggest they do and should be trusted, while AE is not. I agree there's a lack of info on the human health aspects. Your sister will not be able to answer that, you need to measure the air concentrations at the homes of aquarist to get an idea there.

You are potentially right there , this is an assumption that I am making , it is not a scientific conclusion but it doesnt alter the core point. I wanted only to know the actual concentration of the GA.

Your under the illusion that I am on some form of witch hunt for AE, to be fair to that I have focussed on that one because the sales person told me their product was 20% stronger than the other ones and it still could be the case that this means the bottle has a higher ppm relatively speaking. That is a laymans error, potentially. That being said I admit becoming a little biased when they dont Know / comply with the legal requirements to sell the product and I would suspect dont have the means to test it ( i did ask but didnt get an answer at which point i got a little more " vocal " ). As you say / know the contents are not a secret so why not just be straight , only a qualified chemist if stone cold sober would mix up this brew. The ability to smell the product is a function of airborne concentration and excel / Easycarbo users are reporting that they cant not smell anything with excel or easycarbo.


plantbrain said:
So you'd need a meter to measure the levels with typical use in a poorly ventilated room, at high concentrations, perhaps with several tanks etc. Then see what the ppm standards are and time of exposure/dose for humans based on the best data available for risk.

There is some debate in the industry but all but one source says you cant smell it unless its at an airborn concentration of 4ppm. Therefore i extrapulated given the RCN report that in fact the airborn level is potentially dangerous ( open a window and its not perhaps , simple precautions ). The point of debate only is at what concentration it gets airborn before breakdown due to the tanks heat.

plantbrain said:
Maybe there's something to it.
Are you going to do that and take on Seachem and Easylife or just pick on AE?
*If not, then everything you have said is sort of mute ain't it?*


Is it ? It seems to have started a debate , one that might spread in the fish world a little bit . At a minimum as more people figure out whats in the goup they wont try to DIY it and some with asmathics in the family or other respatory problems might avoid it. People with kids may also decide to not use it, people might start to open windows etc.


plantbrain said:
If so, then we can look towards having these products removed potentially and NO LONGER AVAILABLE.
[/quote]
Im sure builders complained when asbestos was taken of the market too . There is a world of study done on this chemical by the medical industry because a LOT of people got sick. People developing photographs where the PPM was MUCH lower got sick. One study I found talked about rats being exposed to it and developing abnormalties , they were put down after the experiment so the longer term effects have not been studied so well,,, but again if you just open a window and leave the room for a while etc. Perhaps that is simplistic. Somehow i dont think that it will happen though and its not the point, you will see that i dicussed labelling and some form of awareness of the inherant danger. Not many people lokc themselves in a room with evaporating glue , common sense can prevail.

Your definition of common sense has expanded it seems with the definition of the simple precautions expanding :

Dont smell it.
Dont leave the bottle open.
It is a good idea to leave a window open.


And yup really do keep out of reach of the kids ..i mean if your mate can accidently drink it ...

It seems to me that the fish world is well connected online , word of the precautions would get about if somebody like yourself were to post them. That being said I imagine that product is being sold to new aquariasts and to people with non planted tanks to kill algae also so some form of decent labelling is appropriate its a shame in a way that it would take a legal exercise by the state to force that to happen.

It is something that is worth talking about at least instead of , on yer bike mate its been used for years.



David
 

JamesC

Member
Thread starter
Joined
3 Jul 2007
Messages
1,273
Location
Bexley, Kent
JamesM said:
what makes you think AE are making this stuff up in a bath tub? They could very well have a different company making and bottling it for them.
viewtopic.php?f=46&t=5602#p61977



The UK has it's own set of rules called CHIP. This makes interesting reading - http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg350.pdf. As the liquid carbon is a preparation containing a dangerous substance then there are requirements that need to be met in regard to labelling and handling. There are exceptions to the rule, ie if it's for the cosmetic industry. I'm not sure if this also includes the pet industry as well.

With regard to the 3 main products been talked about here, I'm now fairly certain that they all use the same active ingredient of glutaraldehyde. Where there may be a slight difference is in preparation with different buffers, stabilisers etc being used.

With what I now know I will think twice about using the stuff. If I did use it, I wouldn't use it with young family members around. I would also make sure the room was well ventilated. Extreme? maybe but looking at the very low levels that have caused health concerns in the NHS I would treat these products with great care.

Once in the tank it does react so becoming safe. If memory serves me correctly it takes about 6 hours for half of it to react.

As with all chemicals some people are much more susceptable than others. If you do use it then use a bit of common and keep the lid on when not in use and don't bung your nose in the bottle to see what it smells like.

Happily for me I've never really used the stuff as I like my CO2.

James
 

davidcmadrid

Member
Joined
21 Jun 2009
Messages
115
JamesC said:
The UK has it's own set of rules called CHIP. This makes interesting reading - http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg350.pdf. As the liquid carbon is a preparation containing a dangerous substance then there are requirements that need to be met in regard to labelling and handling. There are exceptions to the rule, ie if it's for the cosmetic industry. I'm not sure if this also includes the pet industry as well.

Its being sold ( marketed ) either as a fertilizer or as a Herbicide depending on which product you look at so from the research i did , it falls under the legislation. I just confirmed what is common sense really as i notice most other dangerous things are labelled.


Here is a link to Presented by the Office of Environmental Health and Safety referring to Cidex which is 2.4% concentrate. Brief document outlining there are effects to long term exposure : http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:Lrj ... clnk&gl=us


Its just occurred to me That the best way to deal with this is to put all of this in one document and send it to the 3 companies , its clear in the EU at least that things have to be tightened up in order to meet the legal requirements. Tom what would you suggest in terms of labelling?
 

lljdma06

Member
Joined
28 Sep 2007
Messages
171
Location
Miami, FL
hijac said:
plantbrain said:
Not with these products if you follow directions, the beer is likely more risk to life and limb;)

I'm holding a bottle of beer in one hand and a bottle of easy carbo in the other.

Living on the edge. 8)

edit - obviously put them down to type.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

But why sacrifice the beer? That is what straws were invented for my friend. ;)

This is a fascinating thread. I don't inject CO2 or use liquid products, so this really doesn't effect me, but it is interesting to read both sides. Thanks.
 

GreenNeedle

Member
Joined
19 Jul 2007
Messages
2,727
Location
Lincoln UK
I am confused!!!!

Here is the Formaldehyde label. Is the MSDS on this label? I don't know what one is so you can teach me here so I know what we are talking about. lol.
formlab.jpg


I was wondering if it is on the EasyCarbo label so here is the full label (apart from the rear which is chinese or Japanese.)
ecarb3.jpg

ecarb2.jpg

ecarb1.jpg


I was wondering about other things I DIY with. I have some Cajeput Oil and some Pimenta Racemosa (bay leaf) oil which I use to copy Melafix and Pimafix albeit without an emulsifier in there.

Now these 'oils' clearly say on their bottles do not inhale, do not blah blah etc. yet they are sold by the same person who bottles it and prints do not inhale as aromatherapy oils???? I guess what I am asking is how can something be used for aromatherapy if it says on the bottle it is not to be inhaled?

What I am getting at here is are the warnings there for HSE reasons whilst the authorities are quite aware that they are being used for these purposes. Are the 2 labels above exempt because they are pet products? Our law is very overcomplicated and whilst they slap regulations on a lot of things they always seem to make sure there are plenty of reasons for exclusions so that they don't hamper businesses.

I keep the Formaldehyde, EasyCarbo, Cajeput and Pim' Race' Oils, fertilisers, ph tests, pressurised CO2 all at ground level in my tank cabinet, which is in my lounge and I have a 3 and 4 year old. They are always next to the tank but I think I am responsible enough to be able to handle the products after all if (I rarely use it)I add Excel I syringe the dose, put the lid on , empty the syringe into the tank, flush the syringe with the tank water and then job is done. 20 seconds total for the job, 3 or 4 seconds with the bottle lid open. Same with the Formaldehyde.

At the end of the day we could take probably 50% of every product sold off the shelves to minimise risks and safeguard the population from their own foolishness/carelessness but I think it would be a poorer country for it.

AC
 

Aqua Essentials

New Member
Joined
24 Jan 2008
Messages
1,386
Location
Devon
davidcmadrid said:
Your under the illusion that I am on some form of witch hunt for AE, to be fair to that I have focussed on that one because the sales person told me their product was 20% stronger than the other ones and it still could be the case that this means the bottle has a higher ppm relatively speaking.

I'm not getting involved in this thread but I will set you straight.

You clearly misheard what we stated about Aqua Carbon. It's 20% stronger than Seachem Excel but is not stronger than Easycarbo. This is apparent by the dosage:

Aqua Carbon = 5ml per 50L

Easycarbo = 1ml per 50L

I now believe this forum should be locked as it will only escalate.
 

Steve Smith

Member
Joined
19 Jul 2007
Messages
4,417
Location
Wellesbourne, UK.
Themuleous said:
I think we all need to take a step back here, lots of potential accusations being banded about and that does no one any good. If you dont like the product or are weary about health and safety, dont use it! Simple as that aint it?

Sam

Agreed. There have been a lot of points made and questions raised, but it's almost getting to be a wtich hunt. I would say if any of you have any legitimate concerns, you should take it to the manufacturers of those products and ask them directly.

I don't think it's necessary to lock this thread (yet) but please consider your responses and be cautious. We don't want any libelous comments being banded about willy nilly...
 

jonny_ftm

Member
Joined
21 Jan 2009
Messages
137
Location
Switzerland
Hi,

I work in the medical stuff. After reading through this thread, I chose the safe part. I'll be giving away my 2 seachem excel bottles I just bought for my ongoing nano aquarium. Hopefully I never used them yet. I'll definately go gas CO2

This is my choice. I just wanted to thank people that are raising the concern about the safety of such mysteriously labeled products. By expierience, when managing such products, never minimize the potential impact on your health in long term use. Even more concern would be vital if you have young children playing around a volatile potentially toxic product.

Many medicines go into deep stages of testing before marketting, yet they were revealed 10 years later to be unsafe. For a product starting on the unsafe side, your choice, after you read this thread, can't be more on purpose of accepting quiet evident potential risks.
 

davidcmadrid

Member
Joined
21 Jun 2009
Messages
115
SuperColey1 said:
I
Now these 'oils' clearly say on their bottles do not inhale, do not blah blah etc. yet they are sold by the same person who bottles it and prints do not inhale as aromatherapy oils???? I guess what I am asking is how can something be used for aromatherapy if it says on the bottle it is not to be inhaled?

You know what thats a good point and it is not a question I can answer. That being said nobody ever won a case against the manufacturer of Aromatherapy products or the employer ( to my knowledge based on a quick google search ) because it was dangerous and nobody ever felt the need to perform exhaustive testing on what level of it may be dangerous or not and conclude that the best thing to do is just use something thats 4 times more expensive and it probably doesnt appear on the CDC or HSES list. Again that is after a quick search. Beyond that there is no point to rehash what is covered above.

I do lock my chemicals in a shoulder high cabinet though and take care with prepared and un prepared solutions.


Do you get a strong smell in the room when you dose easy carbo esp after a water change ( Another user of Easy Carbo has said no.) ? What about Excel i used it once before stopping and cant remember one way or the other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top