Is a new ‘nanodote’ the next big thing in snakebite treatment? Not yet.

UCI chemistry professor Ken Shea (right) and doctoral student Jeffrey O’Brien have developed a potential new broad-spectrum snake venom antidote. Photo credit: Steve Zylius / UCI
UCI chemistry professor Ken Shea (right) and doctoral student Jeffrey O’Brien (left) have developed a potential new broad-spectrum snake venom antidote. Photo credit: Steve Zylius / UCI

Living in countries like the U.S., Australia, and the U.K., it can be all too easy to forget that snakebites are a serious and neglected global medical problem. It’s estimated that upwards of 4.5 million people are envenomated by snakes every year; about half of them suffer serious injuries including loss of limbs, and more than 100,000 die from such bites.

Much of this morbidity and mortality could be prevented if faster, easier access to the therapeutics that target and inactivate snake venom toxins could be established. But effective antivenoms are difficult to produce, expensive, and usually require storage and handling measures such as refrigeration that simply aren’t possible in the rural, remote areas where venomous snakes take their toll. Seeking to solve many of the issues, a new wave of researchers have begun the search for alternatives, hoping to find stable, cheap, and effective broad-spectrum antidotes to snake venom toxins. One such group at the University of California Irvine recently announced a promising new candidate: a nanogel that can neutralize one of the most dangerous families of protein toxins found in snake venoms.

In a press release published last week, the scientific team—led by chemistry professor Ken Shea—drew attention to their most recent paper unveiling the new possible therapeutic, which was published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society in December with Shea’s Ph.D. student, Jeffrey O’Brien, as lead author. The team dubbed the polymer nanogel material, which consists of readily available acrylamide derivates, a “nanodote.” Continue reading “Is a new ‘nanodote’ the next big thing in snakebite treatment? Not yet.”

Arachnophobia in the Medical Literature: Are Published “Spider Bites” Reliable?

Eight legs to cuddle with! Photo by Bryce McQuillan
Eight legs to cuddle with! Photo by Bryce McQuillan

If the above photo makes you cringe, you’re not alone. The fear of these beasts, called arachnophobia, is surprisingly common. Somewhere between 15 and 55 percent of people get anxious around spiders or even pictures of spiders. Even many who can stomach the sight of these eight-legged animals would be hesitant to perform the a brazen act of actually holding one—after all, everyone knows spider bites fester into giant, gaping sores which leave hideous scars.

At least, that’s what we grow up believing. In reality, though, there are some 40,000 species of spiders, only a dozen or so are actually dangerous to humans. And of those, only the venom of recluse spiders can cause the kind of tissue death (called necrosis) that we so often attribute to spider bites. Recent studies have shown that, instead, people assume the worst of innocent spiders when much more sinister species, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are to blame for their wounds.

We would hope that doctors would be more discerning—that they would be able to properly identify spider bites when they (very rarely) occur. But a new paper suggests that our trusted physicians may not be better than the rest of us. A review of clinical literature found that a whopping 78% of “spider bite” cases may be misattributed. Continue reading “Arachnophobia in the Medical Literature: Are Published “Spider Bites” Reliable?”

Baby Snake Shows Why The Dead Can Still Be Deadly

Remember that story from last fall about the Chinese chef that died after being envenomated by the severed head of a cobra he was cooking? (Well, if not, here’s a good summary.) Many dismissed the tale outright, thinking a snake couldn’t possibly be lethal if it was no longer living. But a great photo taken this week by Lee Reeve shows just how dangerous venomous animals can be, even after death:

A drop of venom on the fang of a dead baby C. atrox. Photo by Lee Reeve
A drop of venom on the fang of a dead baby Crotalus atrox. Photo by Lee Reeve

Lee found this wee western diamondback rattlesnake (Crotalus atrox) dead this morning. It was the runt of a recent litter, and had struggled in spite of months of assisted feeding, so Lee wasn’t surprised the little guy didn’t make it. But just because the small snake was dead didn’t mean Lee could be carefree about handling it, as he explained in a Facebook post:

“Looked like he hadn’t been dead for very long, so I took the opportunity to show why they’re dangerous, even when dead. The liquid coming from the fangs is venom, and will be just as toxic as it was when the snake was alive. Prick your finger on and the fang (or even the bottom teeth), and you got yourself an envenomation.”

Even once dead, venom that is stored in the venom gland can be injected into an unsuspecting victim if pressure is applied. And snakes, like other animals (even us!), can exhibit muscle movements post-mortem, so even if the animal isn’t alive, you can’t be sure it won’t move unpredictably. As someone who has worked for years with venomous animals, I’ve had to be careful with my study organisms even months after their demise (frozen venom can stay potent for a long time!).

So should you come across a dead snake — or anything else with venomous fangs, spines, spurs, etc — be careful! Don’t assume the dead are harmless to the living.

 

Should We Stop Using Vinegar To Treat Box Jelly Stings? Not Yet—Venom Experts Weigh In On Recent Study

The dreaded Chironex fleckeri, studied in the new research, and responsible for some of the worst stings in the world. Photo by Dr. Robert Hartwick
The dreaded Chironex fleckeri, responsible for some of the worst stings in the world. Does new research change everything we thought we knew about how to treat stings? Experts don’t think so. Photo by Dr. Robert Hartwick

When you’re stung by a box jellyfish, you know it almost immediately. These somewhat squarish shaped cnidarians are armed to the bell with some of the most painful venom in the world. Long tentacles are packed with millions of stinging cells, called nematocysts, each with its own microscopic, needle-like harpoon-tipped tubule waiting to plunge into your flesh and inject the animal’s intense venom. The pain is not only debilitating, it can also be deadly. More than 60 deaths from box jelly stings have been reported in the last forty years.

Being stung is an awful experience. The best course of action is to remove any tentacles quickly to ensure that nematocysts that haven’t fired don’t get the chance to add their venom to the sting, and then treat for pain. Luckily enough, scientists discovered early on that vinegar (~5% acetic acid solution) irreversibly prevents nematocysts from firing, allowing people to rinse off tentacles without causing more trauma (which is also how the folk remedy of peeing on a sting originated, though vinegar is more effective and far less gross). For this reason, vinegar has been the go-to emergency response to box jelly stings for more than twenty years. It is currently the primary recommended treatment by the Australian Resuscitation Council, the American Heart Association and the American Red Cross.

“Now (we’re saying) don’t do what we’ve been telling you to do for the last 30 years,” Jamie Seymour, associate professor at James Cook University, told reporters at The Australian. Seymour’s sudden change of heart is the result of new research published by him with colleagues from the Cairns Hospital, including lead author Philippa Welfare. Other news sites have been quick to cover the story which originated in a press release from James Cook University, warning that “vinegar on jellyfish sting can be deadly” and that “Queensland researchers have discovered the cure can kill.”

Not so fast, guys.

Continue reading “Should We Stop Using Vinegar To Treat Box Jelly Stings? Not Yet—Venom Experts Weigh In On Recent Study”