Perpetuated fear in our hobby

So I see a lot of threads about "hot" species and potency of venom...My question is this...In a hobby where scientific research of these animals began only 200 years ago (and which is still very limited), how can there exist this common knowledge about some species being significantly more dangerous than others?...Do the people (who are in charge of writing the texts) just assume the common rule of nature that if its more colorful and complex it must be more dangerous?...I mean let's face it, with all the books that we have at our disposal, NONE, go into any more detail than "these bites are considered more dangerous"...And if this is the case, are we just buying into our own irrational fears?...Which makes us no different than common people afraid of tarantulas for their own ridiculous assumptions...Granted, how often is someone from Minnesota going to come into contact with an Ivory Ornamental...But as tarantulas become more popular as pets, these are issues that need to be scientifcally tested and measured...Then, and only then, will we have true knowledge on the subject...I know there are a lot of smart people on this board with connections, status, "pull", whatever you want to call it...I challenge us as enthusiasts to conduct studies on these matters and settle the dispute once and for all...Until then, no matter how much we argue hypotheticals, we are no different than the average joe down the street thinking tarantulas can jump 20 feet in the air...

If one certain species of tarantula is known by people who have been in the hobby for a very long time to have a more painful bite than other species, then it is blind stupidity to ignore this. Some people act is if they simply can not cope with hearing that certain T bites are worse than others -- why in the world is this?? ALL the factors, both good AND BAD, should always be paid attention to.

I agree more testing needs to be done. But testing in the field, as it were, by people who know Ts and their bites is every bit as important as some dude in a lab coat doing the testing and collecting bite reports. No one on this board is running around saying Ts are deadly, just some have more potententially painful bites than others... people have a right to know this when selecting what they feel is right for them.

Yesterday I asked if pokies were more "hot" than other species, and the thread degenerated into an argument that had to be closed by a moderator. I apologised for using the term "hot" since it made it sound like they were deadly and I did not mean that to be the implication and I corrected myself, but people wanted to argue the composition of venom rather than discuss the actual affects of the bite, which was avoiding the issue IMHO. If it hurts like hell, it hurts like hell and telling people to stop talking about it doesn't do anyone a bit of good.

If everyone thought pokie bites were as easy to deal with as a g. rosea's... then we'd have a lot of people running to the hospitol because evidence points to their bites NOT being as easy to recover from. And THAT would do more to cause fear of Ts in the media than anything else, with all those bite cases at the hospitol because they wonder WTH is going on. Informing n00bs to the hobby is the smartest thing to do for the hobby.

My 2 cents. (again. LOL)

Anansi said:

Do the people (who are in charge of writing the texts) just assume the common rule of nature that if its more colorful and complex it must be more dangerous?...I mean let's face it, with all the books that we have at our disposal, NONE, go into any more detail than "these bites are considered more dangerous"...

Click to expand...

The reports of some tarantulas being more venemous than others isn't based on colour or complex, it is based on a series of bite reports where people have reported more painful and uncomfortable effects. If more than one person experiences dizzyness, nausia and spasms after being bit by a particular species of tarantula, it is wise to let other hobbiest know about it.

Anansi said:

I challenge us as enthusiasts to conduct studies on these matters and settle the dispute once and for all...Until then, no matter how much we argue hypotheticals, we are no different than the average joe down the street thinking tarantulas can jump 20 feet in the air...

Click to expand...

Exactly how are we going to conduct studies? There is no way any of us are going to want to to be bitten by a series of tarantulas to test the potency of the venom, and i doubt anyone has the equipment or money to study it themselves. I agree there needs to be more work done on tarantula venom, but unless someone is going to agree to cough up a lot of money to pay for research in a specialised lab, its not going to happen. Until then, it makes sense to listen to other peoples bite reports and react accordingly.

Cheers,

one way of testing could be testing their prey. take a blood sample before and after the bite? like maybe using pinkies or something..just a thought.
if you want to use your finger go right ahead

I think the best way to test it is take a person and have him or her get bitten by a G. rosea. Wait 1 month and then have them get bitten by a B. smithi. Wait another month and get bitten by An Usambara. Wait another month and then have them get bit by some kind of pokie. Then repeat with 10 more people. Write down the results......... If it was a dry bite or if they were certain venom was injected, and if there wasn't get bit again by the same species before moving on. Hehe if you have read this far and think I am crazy, then I must tell you I am joking.

Scorpiove said:

I think the best way to test it is take a person and have him or her get bitten by a G. rosea. Wait 1 month and then have them get bitten by a B. smithi. Wait another month and get bitten by An Usambara. Wait another month and then have them get bit by some kind of pokie. Then repeat with 10 more people. Write down the results......... If it was a dry bite or if they were certain venom was injected, and if there wasn't get bit again by the same species before moving on. Hehe if you have read this far and think I am crazy, then I must tell you I am joking.

Click to expand...

I didn't think you were crazy. In fact, I could think of quite a few candidates. We do need a few test subjects so that there is less of a chance that the reaction is invalidated by allergy.

Jeri
Psycho B****

Jeri said:

I didn't think you were crazy. In fact, I could think of quite a few candidates. We do need a few test subjects so that there is less of a chance that the reaction is invalidated by allergy.

Jeri
Psycho B****

Click to expand...

Yeah there would be so many possibilities you would have to account for, like what if an individual is allergic to one type of t venom and not another. What if they are allergic to all types. Thats why the bite reports although good don't give a big picture of the whole ordeal. Sure someone might get bitten by an usambara and have certain effects but would that happen with everyone? What about the people who did get bit by the usambara and didn't have any lasting effects? Were those dry bites? Did they have special tolerance? Were they not allergic? So many questions need to be answered. So whos willing to step forward? Need 10 volunteers. ;P

The simple answer to your root question is: only a handful of tarantula enthusiasts can be called scientists or even have academic connections therefore what spider hobbyist A has to say about the venom strength of his Poecilotheria species must have some merit because nothing else has been said about it by an academic scholar of any sort. I guess it goes without saying that venom is one of those things that effects everyone differently so I would say, yes, we are buying into our own irrational fears. The fear that one is going to mess up, make their tarantula angry and be in agony for a couple of days.

Yes, there are books upon books and plenty of articles to read. Generally speaking, new hobbyists or even the casual hobbyist doesn' t seem to read them whether they're about venom or general captive husbandry or taxonomy. If they did there would be more educated answers and better questions on message boards like this one. You can challenge the tarantula community to conduct research on venom all you want to. But the community as a whole doesn't have the resources, time, or even desire to properly do so. Besides, I personally think that the effects of tarantula venom on the human body is an insignificant thing to spend time on. Not enough people keep tarantulas in there house and I can speculate that there's hardly anyone that does recieve a good nasty bite from their specimens.

-Lonnie

8leggedrobot said:

Yesterday I asked if pokies were more "hot" than other species, and the thread degenerated into an argument that had to be closed by a moderator.

Click to expand...

Now you really pissing me off. You ask a question and when you get answers that are not the ones you want - the thread get degenerated??
Im so sick and tired of all these forum experts that kept a rosea for 1 year - and suddenly knows it all.
All these people do is spread BAD information about venom, about spiders causing allergy etc etc.

/Lelle

Scorpiove said:

Yeah there would be so many possibilities you would have to account for, like what if an individual is allergic to one type of t venom and not another. What if they are allergic to all types. Thats why the bite reports although good don't give a big picture of the whole ordeal. Sure someone might get bitten by an usambara and have certain effects but would that happen with everyone? What about the people who did get bit by the usambara and didn't have any lasting effects? Were those dry bites? Did they have special tolerance? Were they not allergic? So many questions need to be answered. So whos willing to step forward? Need 10 volunteers. ;P

Click to expand...

I asked Brian G. Fry, a wellknowned toxinologist, about theraphosid venom a while back and allergic reactions, this is his answer:

"The insect venoms cause allergic shock by containing in large amounts proteins that are related not only to the snake venom CRISP proteins but also immunomodulatory proteins secreted by parasitic worms, plant defense proteins etc. These proteins are very allergenic, which is the point of the insects having them. In constrast, the spider toxins are typically small, neurotoxic peptides. I'm not aware of any specific allergenic response consistently attributed to spider venoms. In constrast, the irritating hairs that flicked off of the abdomen of the tarantulas from the Americas can cause significant local effects, with very very itchy hives being a common reaction."

/Lelle

Total 11 years of owning tarantulas. So you were off by a about a decade. And making you mad seems pretty easy unfortunately if anyone states anything about a bad reaction to a bite. But it makes me mad when people want to disreguard it, too so we do disagree about erring on the side of caution. I don't think I'm an expert on all T venom, but Darrin's report led me to do some more searching and I found a lot about how insect venom is being used to create drugs for human usage, ranging from affecting the brain to the heart and lungs so it's obviously not all bad.

No one is spreading anything but information that has been gathered about tarantula bites, good and bad. One important reason to think about it is because you never know which bites you could be more sensitive to, but if some cause greater reactions then greater caution should be used, and that's basically what I've been saying.