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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.'
'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 #3
My carp encyclopedia Jon told me this ages ago.
My carp encyclopedia Jon told me this ages ago.
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..
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 #6
there seems to be plenty of Koi owners that have never heard of anyone using propolis at all..
there seems to be plenty of Koi owners that have never heard of anyone using propolis at all..
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.
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.
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? 
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...
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...
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.
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 #9
Thats nuts, bet the poor bugger was probably chilling out under a stationary boat then someone starts it up
Thats nuts, bet the poor bugger was probably chilling out under a stationary boat then someone starts it up
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 #13
That does look very impressive tbf,shame hes chose thst twerp to distribute it
That does look very impressive tbf,shame hes chose thst twerp to distribute it
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/
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/