Bolus dosing

[Mo.]

You have a personal relationship with Claude, Doug and FM in general. Is there pricing or consulting consideration there that should be disclosed? (rhetorical).

How exactly?! You are now just making up lies! Parentheses don’t make it ok.

That’s just being nasty!

 

[Mo.]

And there you have it. The actual reason you are here

lol. No! It’s the reason you’re here! Lol

 

[Featherweight]

OK, we got our 100,000 views and are no further along than when we started. For those of us that are using Bolus and are happy there seemsrbme no point in contributing further. For those that are skeptical good on you.

Im not skeptical of the results, im skeptical of the claims against ALL other methods being made and the strange explanations of why... i see some good results from those bolus dosing. its the other weird stuff that gets my hackles all aprickle

 

[Mo.]

OK, we got our 100,000 views and are no further along than when we started. For those of us that are using Bolus and are happy there seems no point in contributing further. For those that are skeptical good on you.

That’s a fair point.

 

[Mo.]

Im not skeptical of the results, im skeptical of the claims against ALL other methods being made and the strange explanations of why... i see some good results from those bolus dosing. its the other weird stuff that gets my hackles all aprickle

Don’t let it. Just ignore it?

 

[Sisterlimonpot]

@Mo. ,
I statrted to suspect you were a mouth piece for Doug when you kept trying to derail the conversation. It was obvious to me that the only way you'd continue to double down is if you were being encouraged by those pushing the bolus method. I get the need to be in Doug and Claude's good graces and that your time in the trenches will win favor in their eyes.

I'd like to know how much of your responses have been simply passing on statements directly from Doug? What's in it for you to be a surrogate for those guys? That last question is rhetorical. Saying you're not sponsored by them doesn't mean much and it strikes me as odd that you stopped short of revealing the incentives that've already been afforded to you.

The purpose for what I allege has nothing to do with calling you out or taking this to a personal level, it's simply to implore Doug and Claude to come on here and have the direct conversation. Stop hiding behind your minions and step into the light to provide the answers that has pushed this thread to 114 pages.

I understand the reasoning for not wanting to come here directly. Which is why this is the perfect place to have the conversation...

I hope you do come here and lay out your facts so that they can be dissected and discussed in a way that will make sense to the community.

 

[twentyleagues]

Don’t let it. Just ignore it?

What does that mean? This is the whole reason why this is still on going! You said it yourself its not the lighting that drives the ph trend you are seeing. What is it then!!? Based on real world chemistry its not the bicarb. What causes this to happen? Dont say magic crystals.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

You said it yourself its not the lighting that drives the ph trend you are seeing. What is it then!!? Based on real world chemistry its not the bicarb. What causes this to happen? Dont say magic crystals.

I'm kind of curious myself.

 

[Mo.]

@Mo. ,
I statrted to suspect you were a mouth piece for Doug when you kept trying to derail the conversation. It was obvious to me that the only way you'd continue to double down is if you were being encouraged by those pushing the bolus method. I get the need to be in Doug and Claude's good graces and that your time in the trenches will win favor in their eyes.

I'd like to know how much of your responses have been simply passing on statements directly from Doug? What's in it for you to be a surrogate for those guys? That last question is rhetorical. Saying you're not sponsored by them doesn't mean much and it strikes me as odd that you stopped short of revealing the incentives that've already been afforded to you.

The purpose for what I allege has nothing to do with calling you out or taking this to a personal level, it's simply to implore Doug and Claude to come on here and have the direct conversation. Stop hiding behind your minions and step into the light to provide the answers that has pushed this thread to 114 pages.

I understand the reasoning for not wanting to come here directly. Which is why this is the perfect place to have the conversation...

I hope you do come here and lay out your facts so that they can be dissected and discussed in a way that will make sense to the community.

I haven’t spoken to Claude about Bolus ever.

The last time I spoke to Doug was probably a couple of months ago and before that probably another few months .
I think we spoke about trace element levels and him having a few of my chalice frags that never got delivered.

Our discussions around bolus are probably 9-12 months old now.

Again- if you care to look back, you will see that I post mainly observations from my tank and what I see in my tank and the changes I’ve noticed in switching back and forth from kalk.

I’ve always said my tank was good with Kalk, but I ran out of evaporation.

I have had ZERO incentives to say what I have said in this thread. I have said that many times, yet you selectively ignore it.

I hope it is (more) clear for you now.

LOL.

 

[Mo.]

What does that mean? This is the whole reason why this is still on going! You said it yourself it’s not the lighting that drives the ph trend you are seeing. What is it then!!? Based on real world chemistry it’s not the bicarb. What causes this to happen? Dont say magic crystals.

Don’t know, but if the only difference between balling light and bolus on 3 separate occasions in my tank was the chemical dosing and no other husbandry and the main observation was a gradual increase in tank pH after a week or two.

Then what gives? I have mentioned this many times on here and still get told “it can’t happen.”

But others have noticed it too, it seems. At this point l, I’ll just accept that we don’t know why it happens.

 

[reef_ranch]

Don’t know, but if the only difference between balling light and bolus on 3 separate occasions in my tank was the chemical dosing and no other husbandry and the main observation was a gradual increase in tank pH after a week or two.

Then what gives? I have mentioned this many times on here and still get told “it can’t happen.”

But others have noticed it too, it seems. At this point l, I’ll just accept that we don’t know why it happens.

Mo, with respect, we don't know "that" it happens; the "that" being that bolus dosing causes an increase in pH. No one has published controlled experiments demonstrating the effect. Your observations are not nothing, but they certainly aren't proof of anything either. Because the known body of science concludes that no such effect should occur, skeptics are entitled to some proof beyond anecdote that the effect does actually occur. Fair?

 

[Mo.]

What does that mean? This is the whole reason why this is still on going! You said it yourself its not the lighting that drives the ph trend you are seeing. What is it then!!? Based on real world chemistry its not the bicarb. What causes this to happen? Dont say magic crystals.

It means- if there is no current explanation, don’t break your back trying to find one, especially if it doesn’t make sense to you. Ie magic crystals.

I don’t believe that Laboratory style experiments in this forum will be possible And true laboratory experiments are probably beyond the scope of the hobby?

But if you don’t believe that bolus helps keep the pH up, then try it.

What would help is to know if this is a consistent finding or if not, why it happens in some tanks and not others.

I’m just saying that I saw the pH response with bolus and I didn’t drive the 120% lighting period at all and I still saw a pH response. This is at variance to Randy’s first page edit point 3.

I’m not questioning that. I’m just reserving judgement, because my experience was different.

As I’ve said before, it will come out in the wash. I’m just interested in seeing how well it does. If I get bored, I might change method. At the moment I like it.

Nothing more to say really.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Don’t know, but if the only difference between balling light and bolus on 3 separate occasions in my tank was the chemical dosing and no other husbandry and the main observation was a gradual increase in tank pH after a week or two.

Then what gives? I have mentioned this many times on here and still get told “it can’t happen.”

But others have noticed it too, it seems. At this point l, I’ll just accept that we don’t know why it happens.

I’ve certainly said many things about it, such as trying to understand in detail what was being compared to what. Still don’t know.

When non bolus dosing, was the alk maintained at the peak of the bolus? The minimum of the bolus? Something else?

That said, a pH effect that you say can take 2 weeks to manifest opens itself up to many other explanations than the dosing, and seems to imply it isn’t observed after a single dose. Is that agreed upon by the bolus crowd: the pH effect does not show itself from a single dose?

 

[Mo.]

Mo, with respect, we don't know "that" it happens; the "that" being that bolus dosing causes an increase in pH. No one has published controlled experiments demonstrating the effect. Your observations are not nothing, but they certainly aren't proof of anything either. Because the known body of science concludes that no such effect should occur, skeptics are entitled to some proof beyond anecdote that the effect does actually occur. Fair?

Maybe our posts have crossed paths, but
Scientific laboratory experiments in our hobby are sparse.

If they do arise, I would love to see the results as much as you.

We don’t have much else to go on unfortunately.

As I’ve said before, spatial and temporal observations are also useful. That’s what will “come out in the wash” and I suspect will be the best we’ll get from an observation point of view.

If there is published science, then that would spark an interesting debate for sure.

Until then, you might not know whether bolus gives a steady pH rise, but I’ve seen it in triplicate. One day you might try it too, but I won’t hold my breath.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Until then, you might not know whether bolus gives a steady pH rise, but I’ve seen it in triplicate. One day you might try it too, but I won’t hold my breath.

We’ve seen a fellow bolus doser here suggest bicarbonate bolus dosing does not boost pH but the FM product does.

I have no idea if that is true, but if so, that would seem to have lots of implications, including that all of the special explanations that relate to bicarbonate itself are not true, and that it’s not even apparent that the actual bolus has anything to do with it.

Thoughts?

 

[Mo.]

I’ve certainly said many things about it, such as trying to understand in detail what was being compared to what. Still don’t know.

When non bolus dosing, was the alk maintained at the peak of the bolus? The minimum of the bolus? Something else?

Don’t know. I didn’t test every hour the closest I got was when I first posted - maybe it was six times for a day or two- and I’m not about to do it now. I’d rather keep some expensive reagents for longer.

That said, a pH effect that you say can take 2 weeks to manifest opens itself up to many other explanations than the dosing, and seems to imply it isn’t observed after a single dose.

There was a steady rise in peak pH, which you said couldn’t happen when I asked.

It happened on 3 separate occasions though, when going balling light to bolus.

There was also an initial drop in pH when switching from kalk this last time, to 8.2 peak with a gradual rise in pH from a peak of 8.2 to now a consistent 8.48.

Is that agreed upon by the bolus crowd: the pH effect does not show itself from a single dose?

Don’t know. A single dose does boost pH, but each day in the initial phase, the peak oh for the day seems to rise.

And since I haven’t spoken to Claude about it at all and to Doug at least for several months, I’m not sure what the bolus crowd say about it.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

There was a steady rise in peak pH, which you said couldn’t happen when I asked.

It happened on 3 separate occasions though, when going balling light to bolus.

There was also an initial drop in pH when switching from kalk this last time, to 8.2 peak with a gradual rise in pH from a peak of 8.2 to now a consistent 8.48.



Don’t know. A single dose does boost pH, but each day in the initial phase, the peak oh for the day seems to rise.

And since I haven’t spoken to Claude about it at all and to Doug at least for several months, I’m not sure what the bolus crowd say about it.

Well, you are putting words in my mouth. I may have said it didn’t happen from some particular aspect, like dosing bicarbonate vs something else or bolus timing vd something else. I’m sure I never said it didn’t happen.

 

[Mo.]

We’ve seen a fellow bolus doser here suggest bicarbonate bolus dosing does not boost pH but the FM product does.

I have no idea if that is true, but if so, that would seem to have lots of implications, including that all of the special explanations that relate to bicarbonate itself are not true, and that it’s not even apparent that the actual bolus has anything to do with it.

Thoughts?

I haven’t tried it with other alk products, but it’s not difficult if somebody wants to do it. It would need a fresh bolus user.

If I did that now it would be to see if the effect is maintained, which again is a different story.

However, if as you say the Fm is only bicarb, it shouldn’t be any different to the other products?

All other chemistry aside. If nothing else, It’s very reassuring to see the bolus dose done, a small spike in pH at the time and you know you’re good for the day.

I have the confidence to say at least that is one practical benefit that I like. I can see the dose done on my apex. And if it misses, you can detect it immediately.

 

[Mo.]

Well, you are putting words in my mouth. I may have said it didn’t happen from some particular aspect, like dosing bicarbonate vs something else or bolus timing vd something else. I’m sure I never said it didn’t happen.

Maybe my misinterpretation, but that’s the message I recall- that a steady rise in pH from bicarb dosing is not possible.

 

[Mo.]

Mo, with respect, we don't know "that" it happens; the "that" being that bolus dosing causes an increase in pH. No one has published controlled experiments demonstrating the effect. Your observations are not nothing, but they certainly aren't proof of anything either. Because the known body of science concludes that no such effect should occur, skeptics are entitled to some proof beyond anecdote that the effect does actually occur. Fair?

Randy- this is an example of what I recall. I may be wrong, but Reef ranch seems to think the same thing for some reason and there are others on the thread who have said the same.

Maybe you are not the source.