|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by SwampY on August 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ok, I will chime in Al..
I'm not saying it wasn't a mamba bite, it could have been... but... I don't see enough evidence to start yelling "mamba on the loose, everyone run!"
1. The snake was only observed by someone who has no experience identifying dendroaspis.
2. The snake seen was only 3 feet long. That could fit any number of green snakes. (rough green, any number of trimeresurus, oxycephala etc) -- a 6 foot long green snake would have narrowed the ID's
3. Nobody, not even Joe, can look at fang marks a week after a bite and identify what species bit the person by the appearance of the marks.
Could it have been a mamba? sure. Could it have been something else? yes. One scenario could have been... Guy puts his hand on a tree onto a couple of wasps, they sting his hand, he snatches hand back and sees rough green snake, snake flees, guy has psychosomatic reaction to "snakebite" and freaks. EMS guys show up "is your arm numb?" "well, uhm, maybe... kinda... yeah.."
Now when I say psychosomatic reaction I am not saying the guy is crazy, or he is making it up, psychosomatic reactions produce VERY real symptoms.
You can't offer the fact that his symptoms subsided upon antivenin as proof of the presence of venom. If it were a psychosomatic reaction and he expected to feel better when he got a shot, he would have felt better if you gave him a shot of sugar water. Maybe he would have started getting better at that point if you did nothing.. there's just no way to tell.
Like I said, I'm not saying it wasn't a mamba, I'm saying there are other possibilities, and not just the example I gave.
Is there enough evidence to start yelling "mamba on the loose?" I don't think so. If you smell smoke in a theater is that enough to start yelling "FIRE!?" and trampling people? no, it could be an idiot behind you smoking a cigarette.
Regardless of whether it was or was not a mamba, the mamba was made real to the public when the stories hit the newspapers. Saying there was a mamba made it real to every person reading, both public and politician. It's too late, the mamba is real whether it was there or not.
At least with sasquatch you have footprints and shaky video to back up the eyewitnesses. With this you don't even have that much...
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by pictigaster1 on August 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Joe I have the utmost respect for you and what you do.If this gets you the needed publicity and funds yall need that is great hell you might have to save my life one day.The reason most of us still do not believe this story is no snake has been found,and a full and complete story was never made available to us.I know that we are not entitled to all the facts.But you know snake people we like to think we are a cut above the rest most of the time anyway .I will not post on this again As I take you at your word and if this is what you believe I will question it no more.Man those gabbys you produced are too kool good luck in finding the snake we want no one else hurt..............Archie
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by FLAohHerper on August 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Larry,
Believe me,I know what a startled mamba will do.I have worked with the same ones as you at the outpost and those are somewhat calm.I just think if the snake was in a tree it would have seen/felt him coming and would have fled. But there is no rule book on snakes so who knows what really happened but the man who was there.
I also agree as well with a 3 foot green snake being one of many to the untrained eye.With all the importing of vine snakes,that could be the unidentified snake and he had a bad reaction to it.
That might not be the best example but I hope everyone sees my point.
It seems we have drained everything possible out of this topic and all we can say is,it is what it is and we hope no more serious consequences arise from this and I am glad the man is ok
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by LarryDFishel on August 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Now that the guy has gone public I think it's safe to point out one more thing that I wasn't sure was appropriate otherwise.
Joe is not going by looking at the fang marks a week later. A member of the venom unit, who has treated verified green mamba bites before, measured the fang marks the day of the bite and found them to be consistent in size and appearance with those he'd measured from previous bites.
I can't say that that absolutely rules out two wasp stings or thorn punctures that happened to occur at the right spacing just as a rough green happend by, but it pretty well rules out a rough green, a 3 foot viper or a vine snake as the source of the "bite".
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by Nakita on August 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
See thats just it.
It seems a select few members of SHHS had inside information regarding the situation while the rest of us were left reading conflicting media coverage.
I can certainly understand patient confidentiality however if the information was shared by Miami Dade with a member even in secret then that confidentiality was already breached and could have been posted anonymously.
One member went so far as to berate us non believers with a scathing post which includes reference to his close relationship with the "players".
Seeing how at least one member was in possession of information that could ease our doubts it seems ridiculous to belittle other members who are not fortunate enough to be "in the loop" with key players. Much of the confusion could have been avoided by sharing the correct information with the rest of us in the first place.
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on August 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I do not think is was so much folks "inside the loop" having unreleased correct information that they did not share with other SHHS members, I think it was more that the fellow bitten was not released from the hospital until Sunday, and then he spent a couple of days at his sisters house keeping away form all the commotion. And his doctors were not going to release any private medical information during that time without his permission.
That, combined with the Daytona reptile show going on during the same weekend, where reptile folks had a chance to spread rumors, worked against each other. It was very easy for some of the false news reports to spread through a show like that, and get repeated time and time again as if they were fact.
Once the bitten fellow was able and willing to talk, Joe, and the folks at Venom 1 took advantage of the opportunity to clear up some of the false information, and to drum up some much needed support for the Venom 1 unit in these days of budget cuts.
This has been a fun thread with all the speculation, however, with so much wrong information floating around, I think folks here were very justified to be skeptical of the bite being from a mamba. And, until the snake is found, I think they are right. Just looking at fang marks, or, the fellow getting better from mamba antivenin does not prove the bite was from a mamba. Capturing the snake at the location would.
And, I do not agree with blindly supporting the good folks at Venom 1, just because you know them to be great folks. Anyone can make a mistake, including them. They made a educated guess, and it was probably right. However, without capture of the snake, it is not right to criticize folks who question the information on this forum, even if the folks supplying the information are highly skilled. And calling folks who do not blindly support the statements of Venom 1 "armchair herpetologists" was a bit over the edge.
So what if they are armchair herpetologists ? At least they have a concern and interest. The number of animals one keeps, or the number of Utube videos someone produces does not determine if someone is a herpetologist, or not. A 8 year old kid with a pet garter snake is as much a herpetologist as someone who keeps 200 snakes. And someone with a fascination for venomous snakes, even if they do not keep them, should not be considered a armchair herpetologist.
That would imply that folks who are not out in the field, or, working professionally with reptiles are somehow inferior, or, should not be posting their opinion on this topic. I do not agree with that.
Best Regards
John Z
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by FLherp on August 28, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Jon,
It is not so much a matter of questioning the information, it is the method of questioning or line of reasoning used that is the problem. As with most of the people on this forum, I would like to believe that there was some error made or the patient was treated as a precaution without much to justify such treatment. However, if I examine the information critically, I will not simply look for all of the information that supports my opinion and disconfirms the opposing view. I will look at the evidence (albeit the facts were distorted by the media with or without malice). I am a preternatural skeptic and I am quite comfortable with a degree of doubt and uncertainty. I must at least entertain the idea that there is in fact a green mamba loose. I must likewise consider that the benefits of the patient being treated vs. the risks of withholding treatment do not quite balance and that it was appropriate to err on the side of caution and provide the treatment. Particularly since some of the signs and symptoms might be difficult to manifest as a result of psychosomatic (psychophysiologic) causes. Some of the symptoms may be vague, but should the attending physician wait for absolute certainty before rendering aid? There is also the implication that this was some kind of publicity stunt to draw attention to Venom 1. This attempts to devalue the efforts they have made and is without merit. Ad hominem arguments (of which the above is one) usually indicate a weak counter argument, so should be avoided.
In this hobby, we must accustom ourselves to things that we don't like happening - someone's animal will escape, someone will be injured by one of their animals, some less responsible folks may release an animal somewhere. Just because I do not like to think of these events, does not prevent them or make them any less likely. The bite incurred by the cable guy is unlikely, but possible - we are not talking bigfoot, aliens abductions, Trilateral Commission, conspiracy theory here. All of the events are in the realm of the possible, however unlikely, and we may just need to admit that we may never have absolute certainty.
Of course after the events are over and the emergency is resolved, it might be a good time to reexamine all of the information to determine the validity of our previous conclusions. Confirmation would be nice, but I am comfortable without absolute certainty. There are a few tests that might have helped, preserve some blood drawn prior to any treatment and use an ELISA or Western Blot (or an appropriate test of your choice) to determine the presence or absence of D. angusticeps or viridis venom. This will not help during the emergency stage, but can provide confirmation after the events. There is not one readily available here at this time, unfortunately. Someone may find and capture the snake - at which time, I expect there will be cries of, " it was staged, that is not the right green mamba!" or "(insert person) is just interested in publicity..."
I am skeptical, but leaning toward the opinion that the person was indeed bitten by a green mamba and that means there is likely one loose in the area. Much safer to operate on that principle and attempt to locate and remove the animal than to assume all is well and leave others at risk...
At issue is that much ado was made about nothing with respect to the news media being all over the place in the information they provided, facts presented by the media were cherry-picked by those posting to further muddy the waters, "facts" were presented that were not quite factual, etc. As I have posted on this subject before in other threads - judgment should be reserved until all the facts are in (or most of them in any case). Much of this was not due to any malice aforethought, but simply to cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias.
Just a few thoughts,
Jeff
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by toddg on August 28, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Preternatural skeptic?" Your an "unnatural" skeptic?
I would also like to point out that a person NOT bitten by a green mamba might also improve if given mamba antivenin, especially if not bitten by anything venomous.
Despite some opinion, there has been no actual evidence presented here. Just posts, conjecture, and opinion, based on, at best 2nd party he/she saids.
Excuse me while I go Jerry McGuire and scream "SHOW ME THE MAMBA!"
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by FLherp on August 28, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If you checked sources other than Wikipedia, you might uncover the definition which includes exceeding that which is natural or regular. I still maintain a modicum of doubt, but lean toward the story as presented by those who were present, and not second or third hand reports. As I said before, it is possible even though it may be unlikely. What evidence would you like to see presented here that would satisfy your inquiring mind?
Additionally, if it was not a mamba, there should be nothing to improve, as there should be no observable signs. If the signs are consistent with a bite from a green mamba, do you simply wait for the patient to decline further? The people involved in treating the patient have seen green mamba bites in the past and would likely be a better judge of the authenticity of this report than anyone else.
You can believe that it is not true however much you wish, that does not mean that it is impossible for it to be so.
|
| |
|
RE: New green mamba article
|
Reply
|
|
by LarryDFishel on August 28, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I was not told anything inappropriate (no personal info) but since a few of the details did not appear in the media at the time, I was not comfortable with even the possible APPEARANCE of impropriety. Posting it annonymously would have been worse. I did not think at the time to ask whether it would be OK to share that info, because I didn't forsee such wild speculation. I should have called them back and asked. That was a failing on my part. It was not about wanting to keep my "inside info".
I don't have a problem with people being skeptical. I guess I was a little baffled by some of the same people who discounted everything coming from the people who treated him but took things they heard at a reptile show as fact...
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
