Inland Reef Salt Study - Where we're going

[MattM]

Hello all!

As someone mentioned, I no longer regularly monitor this forum, so I apologize for not posting more frequently.

I have received assurances from the folks of Reefs.org that they will publish the results and assume any liability. In addition, I have hired back a former Inland Reef employee part-time to finish the study as I no longer have any time to devote to it.

As far as the threatened lawsuit, the cease-and-desist letter I recieved from the attorney threatened additional action if I were to discuss the details of case online. I believe that to be a hollow threat, but I don't particularly want to spend time and money to prove that in court.

So far there has been no reply to my response letter, so either I am in the clear and have successfully called their bluff, or I will get served unexpectedly. :roll:

 

[cdeakle]

Good to hear from you Matt!

Yeah, there just full of hot air. (Aqua&^%$#$%) Thanks for reassuring us the study will be wrapping up!

-Chris

 

[wasabi]

I have hired back a former Inland Reef employee part-time to finish the study as I no longer have any time to devote to it.
1. who is it?
2.is this person going to keep updating info?

i dont want to sound like the eternal skeptic,but how can this test have any validity without more than one unknown individual spearheading a completely in the dark test. how much was spent so far? how far along is the test?what salts are being tested at this point?have thay been sent to the lab?where are the updates? it doesnt take more than 3 minutes to answer all of these questions....it is awful smoky in here

 

[Len]

I don't think it's any secret for me to divuldge that Tom will be conducting the Study with Matt providing assistance. I will ask for regular updates.

 

[Anonymous]

Correct I'm doing the testing - there are no continuity issues, the salts will hopefully be on their way to the lab before the end of the week. I'm not at the shop so I'm not going to list the salts because I'm sure if I listed it off the top of my head and forgot one or included one the vultures would be sure to cry fowl. I will post here when the salts are shipped and when we results back and have sent them to the folks at RDO.

 

[MattM]

The salt list is:

AquaCraft Bio-Sea Marinemix
Aqua Medic Sea Salt
Instant Ocean
Kent Sea Salt
MEI Crystal Sea Marinemix
MEI Crystal Sea Marinemix Bio-Assay
Oceanic Sea Salt
Omega Sea Marine Salt
Tropic Marin Sea Salt

 

[Ninong]

Thanks for the update!

I hope this doesn't sound too nit-picky, but were all of these salt samples acquired recently or were some of them acquired way back in March and April 2003?

The reason I ask is because there have been reported changes in formulation of some of the salts in that list within the past several months. There has also been an ownership consolidation. Central Garden & Pet now owns Oceanic and Kent. Another of the manufacturers represented in your list has made modifications to their formulation this year.

Thanks!

 

[Anonymous]

Some are new some are older samples - if you try to keep with whats current you are going to be chasing your tail forever.

 

[melev]

Some are new some are older samples - if you try to keep with whats current you are going to be chasing your tail forever.

Why would you say that? Perhaps all of the testing is finally now being pursued, and it can not be that difficult to aquire salt from the various brands within the same month.

 

[Ninong]

Some are new some are older samples - if you try to keep with whats current you are going to be chasing your tail forever.

I assume the published results will contain footnotes explaining when each salt sample was acquired since there have been changes in formulation since this project was first initiated on March 12, 2003.

I hate to say this but it seems like a lot of money is about to be wasted on testing that will be challenged before the results are even published.

 

[melev]

I remember reading how the salts would be accumulated, and this does not have to be a time consuming process. But to use salt from last year is a mistake.

Rather than hurriedly shipping off the 9 salts you have on Friday, why not make the effort to get all 9 salts from sources over the next 14 to 30 days? That way they are all the same age, and have the most recent chemical composition.

Send those in for the tests, and we'll get results worth studying. I know that I won't care about I.O. results that are 17 months old. I have no doubt in my mind that salt has a shelf-life, especially where it is being kept stored.

I don't mean to stall this already long study, but now is not the time to rush something and produce rushed results. That reasoning seems flawed. Let's get our monies worth.

 

[Ninong]

Correct I'm doing the testing - there are no continuity issues, the salts will hopefully be on their way to the lab before the end of the week. I'm not at the shop so I'm not going to list the salts because I'm sure if I listed it off the top of my head and forgot one or included one the vultures would be sure to cry fowl. I will post here when the salts are shipped and when we results back and have sent them to the folks at RDO.

I hope I don't sound like a vulture but what happened to the salts that were already tested? Are these nine salts that you expect to send to the lab no later than the end of this week in addition to the ones that have already been tested or is this the first batch?

Back in June, Matt made the following claim in reply to an offer from Nathan Paden:

npaden wrote:
MattM - If we could line up a respected member of the reefing community to volunteer to take the ball and run with it would you forward on the salt samples that have been purchased so far and the lab ware and any remaining funds to that individual to actually do the testing? That would take any possible legal problems out of the picture.


Nathan -

I appreciate the offer, but in reality, the testing is about 3/4 or more completed. When I referred to putting this "on hold" pending the outcome of the threatened lawsuit, I was primarilly referring to the publication of results.

npaden wrote:
It has been over 2 years since this was first proposed...


Just to keep the record straight, I first proposed the the study on 12 March 2003. That is about 15 months, not more than 2 years.
_________________
Matt Marulla


I'm just trying to "keep the record straight."

P.S. -- Maybe this is one of those faith-based programs I've heard so much about.

 

[middletonmark]

Good point. We've all see the changeover from 200g to 160g IO buckets ... which I have now heard many places was accompanied by changes in the formula.

This is in the last year or less for most folks here. Nevermind the other changes to the other salts ... this point raised is important IMO.

What's the point in testing last year's formula. The manufacturer can respond to the study with `they tested an old formulation' ... and it all quickly becomes a waste of time and money.

Then again, it seems that anyone with interest in this study is painted as some sort of evildoer if they say or suggest anything.

 

[Len]

I'm going to start deleting posts in this thread that are not constructive or mature. It's really not helping.

I have recently requested updates and responses from the folks conducting the study.

 

[wasabi]

thank-you for your dedicated effort.

 

[wasabi]

my hat is off to all the folks who donated to this undertaking. the patience and acceptance of you folks says a lot about your character. i can't think of any other people who would stand back and wait this long(after shelling out there cold hard cash) with very little anger or resentment being displayed. the restraint of pen and tongue is amazing.

 

[npaden]

Originally posted by Len:
I'm going to start deleting posts in this thread that are not constructive or mature. It's really not helping.

I'm unsure which posts you are referring to here. I agree that there have been some who have gotten a little heated in their questions but I think most are still trying to keep the ball rolling toward a completed study that actually will mean something when it is completed. If the samples haven't been sent off to the lab yet, I think it would be great to throw in a sample of the new 160 gallon buckets of IO if at all possible. I think we could get someone to get a sample of the most popular salt since this was a rather large change.

FWIW, Nathan

 

[Len]

The posts (for example, one with nothing more then an image of a vulture and another of a dodo bird) were removed some time ago. These are the types of posts I'm referring to. I am all for constructive, mature, spirited dialogue. But I'm sure you'll agree with me the two aforementioned examples lack tact and has no place here.

I am still making repeated requests for updates.

 

[melev]

Len, since they seem to be to busy to respond to specific questions in this thread, can you ask them for a specific reason why they aren't using current salt samples rather than those saved from many many months ago? Some are apparently as old as 17 months ago if I read correctly.

The point of the study is being dilluted with the frustration of the contributors and the 'hurried response' of finally producing some tangible results. I'd rather wait an extra two weeks to have some current results.

 

[Len]

I will definitely express the concerns to them. For the record, I agree with your idea. I am having trouble getting in contact with Matt at the moment, but I will keep trying. I will also discuss this with Tom.