Scientific Studies

I started on a rant on a post about scientific studies regarding the best specific gravity. I decided that it was improper to rant on that post. Here's my "cut and paste" from that post. I'm hoping this forum is left out off the new posts page.


Ok, Here's the problem with reefkeeping in 2003. There are some studies showing everything. Science requires the ability to have replication.

XYZ causes cancer. Ok, nevermind, it doesn't. Oh, wait, ignore the nevermind---XYZ does cause cancer. Well, nevermind, the 3rd nevermind because it appears that large quantities of XYZ causes cancer but in smaller amounts it might not. And so on, and so on, and so on.

The last time I checked, Congress was not providing funding to scientists to do proper studies on the best SG for reef tanks. To be the truth, someone else should be able to take your methodology and replicate it, and come up with the same answer. There just isn't enough money in it for scientists to do proper double-blind studies.

I have read numerous studies on the "proper amount" of numerous things such as SG, Temp, Alk level, etc. Almost always, I attempt to replicate nature. However, our little glass boxes really aren't the ocean that gets the equivalent of a 100% waterchange every 30 seconds. My Alk is cranked higher than NSW because of this. I cannot provide a 100% waterchange at ANY time much less on a regular daily basis. I like the PH protection an elevated Alk level gives me.

Some adjustments could very well be proper based on the fact that our little glass boxes are NOT the ocean.

I don't know everyone here---be nice!!!

 

its true we will never be able to replicate the ocean but we just have to find the best way to maintain the tanks we do have. i think thats why every tank is different and theres so many opinions on how to care for it. every tank has someting different about it that makes that change or adjustment.

 

Hi curt!! Wonder if the NOAA might have sg data? I'll see if I can find anything out.