How does Prime work?

[laritheloud]

3 minutes ago, tonyjuliano said:

If you want to be really sure, go to your water company’s web site.  They will most likely post detailed info about supply (where, why, how, etc.). Some even post detailed composition reports.

I've been trying to find that information for weeks, but I think I have to wait for the July water report. I live in a very small town out here!

[Hobbit]

This conversation has been super helpful. It let me determine that the pH of my indoor tubs was too high for comfort with the amount of ammonia I’m currently seeing. So I added 25% tap water (super soft, almost nothing in it) to each one and lowered the pH significantly. 😃

[CT_]

6 hours ago, Medkow74 said:

You and a few other people I come a cross believe Dave has a beef with Seachem but I don't completely understand why. Yes he does pick on some Seachem products but he also picks on other companies products as well.

I'll mention Prime since that is what this thread is about. He clearly states that he believes that Prime works great detoxifying Chlorine and Chloramine but doesn't agree that is possible to do anything to Ammonia, Nitrites or Nitrates. He actually states that people should "not" stop using this product.

He also clearly uses readings from Seachems dot test products so he must agree that they work as advertised. 

 

It's mostly this page that gives me the impression that he has a beef: https://aquariumscience.org/index.php/5-5-3-2-3-prime-safe-and-sodium-dithionite/

It has stilted language, some statements I believe to be strawmen and statements I know to be verifiably false.

IIRC Somewhere he also dares seachem to sue him for slander if he's actually wrong, and uses the fact that seachem hasn't to prove he's right.  IANAL but my understanding is to prove slander they'd have to prove what he said is false and to do that they'd have to reveal "trade secrets", which is probably more important than winning an internet argument to seachem.

 

[therealTruthSeeker]

13 hours ago, DShelton said:

Let me preface this in two ways:

• I have no axe to grind with Seachem, they make some fine products, many of which I buy and use. I do have an issue with their marketing on some products, especially prime.
• I am a degreed chemist.

I think everyone can agree that most municipal water supplies in the US will contain either 'chlorine' or chloramine, and those two chemical species are bad for fish and inverts.

When gaseous Cl2 is added to water, it reacts with the water like shown in the following two equilibria:

Cl2 + H2O  <--->   HCIO + H+ +  Cl−

HClO  + H20 <----> H3O+   +   ClO-

Reduction is the chemical process by which the dechlorinators work. They 'reduce' the chlorine species (CLO-) that are in water (as an anti-bacterial agent) to the harmless Cl-, and as the ClO- is consumed, both of the above equilibria are driven to the right.

 

The two most common active ingredients in most commercial dechlorinators is either sodium dithionite, or sodium thiosuphate. The chemistry is below:

thiosulphate is one of the products of the decomposition of dithionite in water, so whether your dechlorinator starts with dithionite or thiosulphate, the chemistry is the same.

sodium dithionite          thiosulphate

2 Na2S2O4 + H2O ---> Na2S2O3 + 2 H2SO3

The thiosulphate reacts with hypochlorite in water:

Na2S2O3 + 4 NaClO + H2O ---> H2SO4 + Na2SO4 + 4 NaCl

2 H2SO3 + 4 NaClO + H2O ---> 3 H2SO4 + 4 NaCl

I think you will recognize that final component of both of those equations as common salt, but the key thing here is it has been 'reduced', i.e. its oxidation state has changed from being positive (in the hypochlorite ion) to being negative in the chloride ion. This is what I mean when i say they contain reducing agents. They cause a chemical reduction (gaining electrons).

 

 

 

Now the second half of the chemistry, and the part which is marketing garbage, relates to its ability to 'detoxify' ammonia. In an aqueous solution (i.e. water) gaseous ammonia exists in the following equilibrium:

 

NH3   +   H2O    <------>    NH4+  +  OH

 

That particular equilibrium is pH and temperature dependent, but the key thing here:

• gaseous ammonia is toxic at ~.5 ppm total concentration.
• NH4+ is also toxic, but at much much much higher concentrations (dependant on pH)
• all of the titration based test kits (API, sera, etc) measure that concentration as a total, i.e. NH3 and NH4 together, so the test kits are not giving you the big picture. (The Seachem ammonia alert measures free ammonia. It is the one that hangs in the tank and is a good product since it is free ammonia)

 

What is actually happening in almost all aquaria is:

 

In just about all aquaria with a pH <  ~8.5 or so (which is a huge number of them;  here in N. Texas my tap ranges from 8.0 to 8.2) most of the ammonia (NH3) will exist as ammonium (NH4+). Free ammonia gas, actual NH3, is toxic at ~.5ppm.

A variety of factors (pH and temperature) will affect how much of the NH4 is free NH3 in solution, but in aquarium conditions, it is safe to approximate between .1 and 1% of total as NH3. In other words, your .25ppm "ammonia" as shown by the test kit, at your pH is less than 1% of that as free ammonia.

 

So in other words, the prime is not 'detoxifying' the ammonia. There is just not enough ammonia in the water for it to be toxic. Using the example that @Solidus1833gave of 2ppm total ammonia in their tap water. The actual amount of free ammonia was between: .02 and .2ppm which is not toxic. The prime did nothing.

 

The only way to truly make the ammonia safe is for it to be oxidized from NH3 ---> NO2-   ---->  NO3- and to my knowledge there is no aquarium safe chemistry to do this, beyond the Nitrosomas and Nitrobacter doing so through the nitrogen cycle.

 

 

 

EDIT: I am sure there are some typos, I was typing furiously to get it posted.

While this all sounds good, mainly because I am not a chemist. I have no way to confirm what you say is indeed fact. My problem is that seachem is a major corporation that would likely not place that on a bottle without scientific evidence to back it up. They would be worried in this day and age to be sued for false advertising.  so I can guarantee you they do have a scientist on their team that would argue with you and I would love to see that debate and see who had the real science on their side. If I were as confident as you with your science I would indeed sue them for false advertising.  As it seems you believe you should have a slam dunk case? My second problem is that api also has a product called ammolock. It is just for ammonia.  seems like seachem and api are pretty darn confident that you are wrong too me. My main problem is on her original post I suggested dosing her tank with prime. That in no way would've had any negative impact on her fish or her pocket book since it's loke a penny a dose. So why come out so strong attacking it???

Edited May 12, 2021 by Brian007
wrong info

[CT_]

38 minutes ago, BIG GREEN said:

Well, if you read that link and take his word, Prime is not all that.

 

I had an Ole timer, this guy is cray smart tell me to just use a pinch of table salt for every 10 gallons instead of Prime. 

Agreed.  I'm equally if not more skeptical of seachem's claims about prime beyond its ability to dechlorinate water.  I do believe that seachem employs smart people and that they made a good product for its primary use.  Beyond that, some of the people writing seachem's website and other copy of theirs are clearly not in sync.  There's multiple contradictions and inconsistencies on their website's product's info pages.

[mgudyka]

My favorite part about this thread is that it's based on my post but I don't even use prime but instead fritz ACCR

[OnlyGenusCaps]

Thanks for all of your detailed information, @DShelton!  It all makes sense, and I think dispels some of the hype.

14 hours ago, DShelton said:

in some places his writing style comes across as antagonistic

Yes, I've spoke with him about this in the past, and in response he did soften some of his language.  Being correct and being convincing are so often two different things. 😁

[Hobbit]

13 hours ago, Brian007 said:

I can guarantee you they do have a scientist on their team that would argue with you and I would love to see that debate and see who had the real science on their side. If I were as confident as you with your science I would indeed sue them for false advertising.  As it seems you believe you should have a slam dunk case? My second problem is that api also has a product called ammolock. It is just for ammonia.  seems like seachem and api are pretty darn confident that you are wrong too me.

I think if it weren’t for trade secrets and such, the chemists at Seachem and API would have plenty to add here. I too would love to see that debate, but I’m confident both they and @DShelton have “real science” on their side—we’re just missing important knowledge that these companies won’t share. And I think DShelton is very open to being convinced, since he says here:

Quote

The only way to truly make the ammonia safe is for it to be oxidized from NH3 ---> NO2-   ---->  NO3- and *to my knowledge* there is no aquarium safe chemistry to do this, beyond the Nitrosomas and Nitrobacter doing so through the nitrogen cycle.

(emphasis added)

In terms of why he came down so hard on your previous recommendation, he’s probably just particularly passionate about this since it’s his field. I’m guessing it had very little to do with your recommendation. You were giving helpful advice. 👍 That’s why we redirected the conversation here, so we could all nerm out without it being about anyone’s recommendation or specific problem.

I do have a question for @DShelton and all the other chem people: my impression was that Prime and Ammolock and other products that detoxify ammonia only do so temporarily—that after a while the ammonia will become toxic again (unless it’s used up by bacteria or plants). To me this would suggest that they’re taking any free ammonia and converting it into ammonium (NH4), and then over time it shifts back to ammonia again. Like @Brandy already suggested: 

Quote

I originally was a person who figured you could explain the ammonia question away by some catalyst that I was not aware of which would cause the NH3 to become NH4, and remain stable regardless of pH/temp. I was first picturing something like how EDTA works... 

ORRR maybe they’re sticking ammonia on something else? If I’m remembering my organic chem correctly, it’s not hard to get ammonia to bind to something and lose a hydrogen, like this:

ROH + NH₃ → RNH₂ + H₂O

(I cheated and pasted from Wikipedia. For non-chem people, the “R” in this reaction just means “something.” Like x in math. It’s a placeholder.)

Sort of like what @CT_ was saying about an NH2 ion, but not a free ion.

Over time the NH2 group could come off and turn back into NH3, but for a while, while attached to something else, it would be fish safe.

[Brandy]

14 hours ago, Brian007 said:

My main problem is on her original post I suggested dosing her tank with prime. That in no way would've had any negative impact on her fish or her pocket book since it's loke a penny a dose. So why come out so strong attacking it???

Weeelll as a person who is heavily into genetics and immunology I get really wound up about it when I see some fairly common misinformation.  Personally, this past year has been incredibly hard on me as a scientist, when I feel both politicians AND scientists have been ignoring science and data in favor of emotionally charged anecdotal evidence in the media. It makes you wonder if anyone actually cares what is TRUE anymore, and that is (again, speaking from a personal perspective) incredibly destabilizing to someone who has spent their life in pursuit of an empirical ground truth. I try not to personally attack anyone, despite sometimes feeling that my world view is the one under attack. In this case, splitting this topic off into it's own thread was an excellent idea--the science nerds get to do their thing...

14 hours ago, Brian007 said:

My problem is that seachem is a major corporation that would likely not place that on a bottle without scientific evidence to back it up. They would be worried in this day and age to be sued for false advertising.  so I can guarantee you they do have a scientist on their team that would argue with you and I would love to see that debate and see who had the real science on their side. 

To this I only have one answer...Please click thru to see a fabulous counter example...

 

[Hobbit]

@Brandy I was thinking of that meme but didn’t want to try to find it. Thank you! 😂

[CT_]

3 minutes ago, Brandy said:

Personally, this past year has been incredibly hard on me as a scientist, when I feel both politicians AND scientists have been ignoring science and data in favor of emotionally charged anecdotal evidence in the media.

uuf.  yeah I feel ya there.  It's been very frustrating.

 

27 minutes ago, Hobbit said:

ORRR maybe they’re sticking ammonia on something else? If I’m remembering my organic chem correctly, it’s not hard to get ammonia to bind to something and lose a hydrogen, like this:

ROH + NH₃ → RNH₂ + H₂O

(I cheated and pasted from Wikipedia. For non-chem people, the “R” in this reaction just means “something.” Like x in math. It’s a placeholder.)

Sort of like what @CT_ was saying about an NH2 ion, but not a free ion.

yes this.  or perhaps it just sterically traps NH3 like the fabreze doughnut molecule

[OnlyGenusCaps]

2 hours ago, Brandy said:

AND scientists have been ignoring science and data in favor of emotionally charged anecdotal evidence in the media

Okay, so this would probably take us way, way, way off topic here, but I am completely curious what you mean by this!  I get the politician stuff.  Sure. Sure.  But what scientists?!  I'm intrigued!  🤔

[Brandy]

6 hours ago, OnlyGenusCaps said:

Okay, so this would probably take us way, way, way off topic here, but I am completely curious what you mean by this!  I get the politician stuff.  Sure. Sure.  But what scientists?!  I'm intrigued!  🤔

Yes way off topic.

Suffice to say we are all complicated humans with our own irrational sets of fears. I can understand that, and I am even subject to that. But in a functioning scientific community, you should be called out on your bias regularly and vociferously. It is not just our job, most of us see it as a moral obligation. 

This past year, that has not been my experience, and like the poor nerm working in the big box fish store trying to explain again that you should not put a goldfish in a 2 gallon bowl, I have watched many of my colleagues break, exhausted, and I have had a very hard time maintaining my own faith in the system and our value/place in it.

But I am just one person in a very siloed part of an already siloed community. My experience is purely anecdotal.

[OnlyGenusCaps]

4 hours ago, Brandy said:

Suffice to say we are all complicated humans with our own irrational sets of fears. I can understand that, and I am even subject to that. But in a functioning scientific community, you should be called out on your bias regularly and vociferously. It is not just our job, most of us see it as a moral obligation. 

This past year, that has not been my experience, and like the poor nerm working in the big box fish store trying to explain again that you should not put a goldfish in a 2 gallon bowl, I have watched many of my colleagues break, exhausted, and I have had a very hard time maintaining my own faith in the system and our value/place in it.

Sure, deepen the enigma.  😉  You realize of course, this only serves to make this more intriguing to me, right?  Whatever it is that has happened, that which seems to have challenged your belief that humans can act as impartial actors in the pursuit of knowledge - I'm sorry it's been such a rough year. 

[Hobbit]

19 hours ago, CT_ said:

or perhaps it just sterically traps NH3 like the fabreze doughnut molecule

I hadn’t heard of that before so I looked it up. Cool!

[Medkow74]

On 5/12/2021 at 10:23 AM, mgudyka said:

My favorite part about this thread is that it's based on my post but I don't even use prime but instead fritz ACCR

That's funny. 

One thing about Fritz ACCR. I emailed them to ask if ACCR works for Nitrates and Nitrites like their Complete does and they said no. They also stated basically what Complete does beyond dechlorinate is an accidental side effect of the chemicals. Lol