|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #36
I'm not sure it's that easy to qualify, as has been proven fish get better themselves. I used to use NT Labs for my Koi, did they get better, yes, was it because of the NTL, who can tell, but I acted in what I thought were the fishes best interests.
Can these products be of benefit to fish in small ponds where stress may also be a factor maybe with a strained immune system where they won't heal as fast as in a normal environment, probably, but again needs evidence.
Not sure if I'm repeating myself here, can't be bothered to read the whole thread again, but I mentioned on the forum probably a decade back that I treated a aquarium fish with propolis and the site of application became a hole about the size of a pea. That would fit in with the findings of necrosis iirc from the tests but again hard to qualify.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #35
Does it work on your Koi?
|
|
|
|
I treat my koi and the carp I catch exactly the same
I use products from kusuri to clean and disinfect the wound they treat accordingly
I then use propolis to seal over the top I don’t use it to treat the wound itself
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #32
Or it could be replicated and see what happens 4/5 times.
|
|
|
|
I can understand all the concern about this report , and whether or not we should ( or should not ) be using "carp care" products at all .
However , to my mind the testing that has been done is , in a way , totally useless. Surely the only way to be sure as to whether or not these products are effective is to have two groups of damaged fish ( and it needs to be the same type of damage in both groups ) all in the one tank/pool , and for one group to be treated , the other not .
Maybe I'm being a bit simplistic .......
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #30
Sorry, had a straw that broke the camels back moment. Combination of a bad day and a touch of vino veritas. Sometimes you just need to unload .
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #29
What a crash out
|
|
|
|
|
I've had to spend about £60 to ensure I never land a fish without having carp care immediately on hand for all of my kits. Why do people in charge of clubs, jump on the nearest band wagon without doing meaningful research. Barbed/ barbless, cradles/ mats with walls/ mats without walls. Dropping the lead, nuts, floaters, particles, cork balls, plastic baits, leaders, zigs, wading, drones, alcohol, hook size, particles or not, boilies or not. Groundbait limits, minimum line strength, max line strength, there's probably many more I've missed. It's getting hard to just turn up and fish. That's if you can get into a bloody half decent swim, as for moving onto fish during a " cheeky overnighter " you're having a giraffe. If you don't get there on Monday morning and wait, forget it.I'm close to going back to Gudgeon fishing on the Thames. That's if there's any left. The lake (river fed), I used to catch them in as a kid has barely any fish left due to pollution.
|
|
|
|
Funny isn't it that bait companies now have to list ingredients on something the fish can choose to eat, or not and yet on the other hand you can sell a 'medicine' for carp without any testing or proof that it does what it claims, or even that it simply isn't harmful.
I'll be honest, I haven't put any medication on any of my own carp in ten years. I do on other people's fish if they state that they want you to.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #22
They're really hardy, if they don't got caught in some vital organs hardly they die.
Another example that comes me to mind is a low double carp that when I put on the mat I spotted some strange nylon coming off its body, after a closer check I realise that it was embedded all around its body. After cutted the nylon I was been able gently to take off all the line. Probably this poor fish has been used as a live bait for predatort when it was a little carp and came off, or was released after the session without cut the line (or maybe it has been tied just for fun  who knows) this little bugger has grown with a line that has cut its flesh but it's survived.
They are hard but at the same time they should be delicate creatures if we don't act in the right way.
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at it from a koi keepers perspective, just whacking some propolis on a carps wound is the dumbest thing ever, treating ulcers and wounds in fish is always a multi step approach, at the minimum the wounds should be disinfected, cleaned then a propolis or powder put on after. Just using propolis is trapping any bacteria in the wound making it easier for necrosis
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #23
The world has gone mad 
|
|
|
|
|
I've always stuck to the stuff Vets use - Tamodine , it may be expensive but it does go a long way, and it most defiantly works 100%.
|
|
|
|
|
Quite exciting really, with the new season staring we’ll go from ‘show me your carp care kit’ to im just gonna frisk you down to make sure you don’t have any carp care products.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #20
That one was likely a year or so before. The gashes were still red/open at the bottom of the missing parts. It was feeding okay. It hardly put up any fight, but it's tail was slashed across the top of the root.
Superglued that up with waterproof superglue.
Crazy isn't it how hardy they actually are.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #12
That's my guess to Leon. They then get sucked into the vortex of the blades.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #9
I caught a cassien carp that showed the same central wound of your common, the difference is that it has been happened few days earlier and it was flesh open. Not a good vision indeed.
I would like to show you the pictures, but it's too difficult for me to put pictures on here LOL
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #17
Also, propolis was actually shown in the study to hinder new cell growth in carp to the extent that it starts a process of controlled cell death. That is bad. Bad.
Yes and no, it can be very good, in that it kills infected cells preventing the disease from spreading further and faster than it would normally. Most human topical surgical iodine based preps do the same thing.
The biggest takeaway from it, imo, is that none of these products have actually been tested as to whether they do what they say they do.
You're not wrong, scary really, but we anglers acted in good faith.
|
|
|
|
My biggest question is how, considering it has natural antibacterial properties, propolis doesn’t work. Or didn’t for them in their study at least. Obviously studies have limitations too. Having done my own and been around plenty, there is always limitations and many are often recreated with different results.
But all in all. Think we all knew the effectiveness would never be great anyway. Really we should lather them with honey, nature’s medicine.
|
|
|
|
The biggest takeaway from it, imo, is that none of these products have actually been tested as to whether they do what they say they do.
We just 'think'it does what we want.
The first study into what they actually do shows they don't work like we thought they did.
Also, propolis was actually shown in the study to hinder new cell growth in carp to the extent that it starts a process of controlled cell death. That is bad. Bad.
Its like when Drs used to prescribe cigarettes for chest complaints.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #15
That's quite a recovery 
In the early days I used NT Labs Care kit, ulcer swab and something else I can't quite remember, a cross over from keeping Koi.
Re propolis and my comment earlier I'd be interested to know if those that have it think it smells strongly of Clove.
The sample selected in the study I'm assuming was all sourced from Europe (hard to tell but a fair assumption thinking cost) but if you read into it the best sources of propolis potentially for Carp application, ie those with the highest amount of anti bacterial/fungal compounds they come from South America, specifically of note Brazil. Hence my interest, not all propolis sources are equal, (well, it is a natural blended product to boot too) so to regard all propolis products as ineffective might not be quite right. Be interesting if tests were done to ascertain active ingredients but I can't see companies paying for that. There are papers out there on the web that have tested them, I've linked them on here before but might be pre server reboot.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #13
The product that Gary Bayes used to treat his koi was from Tony Campbell.
Propolis based, with a few other things in it.
LINKY POO™ https://www.cyproguard.co.uk/
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #13
That does look very impressive tbf,shame hes chose thst twerp to distribute it
|
|
|
|
|
I've always been skeptical about these products too, but.... Mr Hamidi is now supplying a propolis based spray. There is a video on his socials with the man behind this potion. If the video and pictures within it (of Gary Bayes Koi) are truthful, no smoke and mirrors, their propolis offering with 'added secrets', may actually work.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #9
Thats nuts, bet the poor bugger was probably chilling out under a stationary boat then someone starts it up 
|
|
|
|
My kit.
Orahesive wound seal, acriflavine or tamodine to disinfect existing wounds and ulcers prior to sealing, and propolis to use on any fresh hook or flank damage.
No point trying to seal larger wounds unless you first give them a bit of antiseptic to kill any bacteria.
Try using the search, look at tamodine, will bring up lots of discussion and alternatives.
NT Labs koi care kit, korda wound kit, Carp Care UK, etc.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Kept my gob shut on this as my own bro-science needed a bit of evidence, but I've always thought it was a tad pointless wiping off a natural protective mucus, to then put a wet product, on a wet fish and sticking it back into a wet pond.
Next up, net dips...
|
|
|
|
This Thames common had been hit three times by a boat propeller. I was going to put some carp care on him, but I only had a tiny little bottle & where exactly would you start? 
|
|
|
|
Regardless, many clubs now insist upon carp care kits being carried at all times and doubt this will change anytime soon.
Money to be made supplying them.
Myself I've been using Orabase for years [ hook holds & wounds ], it was recommended but I haven't a clue as to it's effectiveness?
I have re-caught fish and they have been well healed but tells you nothing I suppose.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #6
there seems to be plenty of Koi owners that have never heard of anyone using propolis at all..
|
|
|
|
Carp are massively resilient. What animals do you know that Can be dragged out the water, get half eaten and still manage to make there way back into the water. And go on to be caught numerous times after. Showing very few signs of the ordeal they have been through... 
As mentioned most of the products out there are used by anglers to go someway to make them feel better in themselves for sticking bits of metal in there face.
I for one use Propolis NT labs. It's used in the Koi industry to treat wounds. It must be of some benefit for them to be using it. So thats good enough for me. It's great that someone is taking the time and the energy to do any actual scientific study into our quarry. I'd imagine these things don't come cheap.
I wonder if any one in the industry would be interesting in funding further research into whether fish actually feel pain through the process of being hooked... Dont think there would be many takers.. 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #3
My carp encyclopedia Jon told me this ages ago.
|
|
|
|
From Bernice Brewster:
'fish treatment is more about the handler feeling better, rather than being effective for the fish. I have seen all manner of substances applied to fish skin such as oral adhesives to secure some form of topical treatment in place, most come off once the fish is back in the water. Fish have a good immune system although at cooler temperatures is dampened down to save energy but I have seen fish recover naturally from wounds/infections which would hospitalised a human for many months. Currently, there isn't a suitable topical treatment but if we treat fish with the respect and careful handling, then they shouldn't need further intervention.'
From Ian Welby:
'non of the various tested products were known to the secondary authors, although I know one of them was apparently based on propolis. They were just a random selection of the most popular brands. One of the issues is non of the products list there actual ingredients.. however propolis has never actually been scientifically tested as a antiseptic for fish.
So yes my take on the results is that I will no longer recommend any topical antiseptic for use by anglers.'
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
The title of the thread is a bit misleading, some of those tested were effective, even if not 'main stream' Carp branded.
It's about time we saw a scientifically proven paper on this subject, hats off to them. I've only skimmed it but the conclusion on propolis is damning in my pov, this sentence says it all.
Discarding the lack of any antibacterial or antifungal effects for propolis against the panel of four major carp pathogens employed in this study
Other things have thrown Qs for me but they're kind of null and void given the above sentence.
Over a decade ago I posted on the forum that a tank fish of mine treated with propolis developed a hole at the treatment site, coincidence, maybe not now, but cell death at site can be a positive.
2 of the 'controls' seem kind of moot too from a commercial pov, iodine/betadine which are being phased out due to carcinogenic links, and any antibiotic, as they'll never be allowed to be used by the 'lay man' due to regulation and fears of antibiotic resistance.
If they do use the paper to make a commercially available product it may be some time in the offing if they test it first. It's a shame they can't say which of the existing treatments to use, it's kind of left us in 'limbo'.
EDIT, on a further read I'll be interested to see which essential oil proved effective. In the post on propolis here many years ago I mentioned my propolis smelled like clove to me and that's because it possibly contained the same Terpine, eugenol, which is a potent anti bacterial/fungal. I wonder if the propolis tested contained eugenol and if so why it wasn't effective.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Big news tbf. I have always doubted propolis as a useful product in angling. What I would say is that just because propolis isn't useful, it doesn't make all carp care products a waste of time. There are antibacterial products available that aint covered by the report.
|
|
|
|
Ian Welby and Bernice Brewster have conducted research into 10 carp care products (propolis based) and concluded that they offer no benefit to carp and actually might hinder new cell growth
LINKY POO™ https://www.facebook.com/groups/185451090859
Very interesting, imo.
I've always used propolis since my barbelling days but wont bother anymore, suppose it means they go back a few seconds quicker!
ATB
Ash
|
|
