Eastern Brown or Coastal Taipan

[waruikazi]

Play it again Sam ........

I know i should take my own advice. But this boy's twisted head has me in right spin.

I want him to explain how he is able discount ALL of the available toxicology information and to make his own ranking of specific animals in order of most venomous to least venomous.

 

[saximus]

I think it's unfair to label said individual as mentally unstable. I think this has just become more of a case of this:

On your previous post Michael, this may be a noob question but why are horses used to antivenom production? Is it because of their size or are they just inherently good at producing the necessary antibodies?

 

[Waterrat]

It's their size (amount of blood), ease and low cost to keep and handle.

 

[mmafan555]

Then i will ask you again. What METHODS are you using or relying on to make this claim?

Will pm you the studies.

 

[waruikazi]

Don't bother just post it.

 

[mmafan555]

I think it's unfair to label said individual as mentally unstable. I think this has just become more of a case of this:

On your previous post Michael, this may be a noob question but why are horses used to antivenom production? Is it because of their size or are they just inherently good at producing the necessary antibodies?

Face it your animals are lame compared to elsewhere and Australia compared to other continents has some of the LEAST dangerous animals overall. No need to get upset about it...like I said all those tourists will easily believe your absurd exaggerations about how dangerous your animals are...But I wont.

Now before I get misquoted for the 1000101001010100101 time...I'm not saying that Australia does not have dangerous animals...that would be an extremely idiotic thing to say. What I am saying is that compared to other continents, Australia has much less dangerous animals and the hype about it being a continent filled with dangerous animals is absurd. Your animals are comparably lame and many of your dangerous animals are very overrated compared to animals elsewhere( with some notable exceptions)


Why I think Australians love to overrate the danger of their animals.

Probably it is an attempt to differentiate themselves from other western cultures. As their culture is very similar/influenced by USA/UK, they use their "dangerous" nature to make Australia seem unique.

I know i should take my own advice. But this boy's twisted head has me in right spin.

I want him to explain how he is able discount ALL of the available toxicology information and to make his own ranking of specific animals in order of most venomous to least venomous.

Omg misquote times 50050505050x.

First off their is no known toxicology test that says the box jellyfish is the worlds most venomous animal.... How it got this reputation...I have no idea. I have never came across any ld50 for a box jellyfish.

Now their are of course the ld50 tests that say the taipans are the most toxic land snake....and I have already went over my numerous qualms with that test( I will do it again if you like.


I can give you a rough top 10 if you want... Of course it is a VERY rough estimate and in reality meaningless but I can give you my opinion if you want.

I will make an additional thread.

 

[Waterrat]

Now it's quite obvious who is lame here. Oh yes, there some cultural differences. Can you please stop insulting us?

 

[waruikazi]

So there it it. You have a problem with Australians, that is what this is all about.

Face it your animals are lame compared to elsewhere and Australia compared to other continents has some of the LEAST dangerous animals overall. No need to get upset about it...like I said all those tourists will easily believe your absurd exaggerations about how dangerous your animals are...But I wont.

Now before I get misquoted for the 1000101001010100101 time...I'm not saying that Australia does not have dangerous animals...that would be an extremely idiotic thing to say. What I am saying is that compared to other continents, Australia has much less dangerous animals and the hype about it being a continent filled with dangerous animals is absurd. Your animals are comparably lame and many of your dangerous animals are very overrated compared to animals elsewhere( with some notable exceptions)


Why I think Australians love to overrate the danger of their animals.

Probably it is an attempt to differentiate themselves from other western cultures. As their culture is very similar/influenced by USA/UK, they use their "dangerous" nature to make Australia seem unique.




Omg misquote times 50050505050x.

First off their is no known toxicology test that says the box jellyfish is the worlds most venomous animal.... How it got this reputation...I have no idea. I have never came across any ld50 for a box jellyfish.

Now their are of course the ld50 tests that say the taipans are the most toxic land snake....and I have already went over my numerous qualms with that test( I will do it again if you like.


I can give you a rough top 10 if you want... Of course it is a VERY rough estimate and in reality meaningless but I can give you my opinion if you want.

I will make an additional thread.

 

[saximus]

You guys need to just take your own advice. This thread could have been a really interesting read

 

[mmafan555]

So there it it. You have a problem with Australians, that is what this is all about.

Nope...I have a problem with Australians over-hyping their animals...thats it...Other than that I like Australians and hope to visit the country one day.

Thats what it is all about....It just as a person who is interested in snakes/venom/toxicology etc I am tired of some of the stuff that I hear...in particular comments such as the ones above....

I feel like Australians overrate/exaggerate about their animals.. That is all. Other than that I have no problem with them.

This is pretty much aligned with my opinion... It doesn't mean I dislike Australians...



This guy here has a similar opinion to mine.
http://members.iinet.net.au/~bush/myth.html

But his ld50 list at the bottom is very incorrect. The Sutherland ld50 study is extremely outdated and wrong on many levels and only uses a few snakes. The Fry one that I will post below is much more accurate and includes many more snakes.

These are the Fry ld50 lists...The most comprehensive lists that we currently have.

Sub-cutaneous LD-50s
LD50 - subcutaneous

Intravenous LD-50s
LD50 - intravenous

Subcutaneous is by far the most applicable for typical bites...Only a select few viper species with huge fangs could maybe give an Intravenous bite. Of course like I said earlier in this thread...many highly venomous snakes are still missing from the Fry list..including the Phillipine Cobra, the Boomslang ( from the subcutaneous list) and 9 species of land Kraits ( Bungarus).

 

[snakehandler]

Ok so I also have an issue with people misquoting LD50 values, a great discussion and subsequent very extensive look at snakes LD50 values is published here, it looks not only at subcutaneous, but intramuscular and intravenous injection as this will also have an impact on results.....read the discussion before reading the tables
www.venomdoc.com/LD50/LD50men.html

 

[waruikazi]

Snakehandler

I actually made a thread 2 years ago and posted that article, or a similar one, the discussion/arguments we had in that thread were rather enjoyable for me. Most of the discussion revolved around the definitions of deadly, dangerous and venomous. Once we had worked out what the three terms meant there was little arguing... except when mmafan fan decided to revive the thread 2 years later.

Nope...I have a problem with Australians over-hyping their animals...thats it...Other than that I like Australians and hope to visit the country one day.

Thats what it is all about....It just as a person who is interested in snakes/venom/toxicology etc I am tired of some of the stuff that I hear...in particular comments such as the ones above....

I feel like Australians overrate/exaggerate about their animals.. That is all. Other than that I have no problem with them.

This is pretty much aligned with my opinion... It doesn't mean I dislike Australians...



This guy here has a similar opinion to mine.
http://members.iinet.net.au/~bush/myth.html

But his ld50 list at the bottom is very incorrect. The Sutherland ld50 study is extremely outdated and wrong on many levels and only uses a few snakes. The Fry one that I will post below is much more accurate and includes many more snakes.

These are the Fry ld50 lists...The most comprehensive lists that we currently have.

Sub-cutaneous LD-50s
LD50 - subcutaneous

Intravenous LD-50s
LD50 - intravenous

Subcutaneous is by far the most applicable for typical bites...Only a select few viper species with huge fangs could maybe give an Intravenous bite. Of course like I said earlier in this thread...many highly venomous snakes are still missing from the Fry list..including the Phillipine Cobra, the Boomslang ( from the subcutaneous list) and 9 species of land Kraits ( Bungarus).

Those LD50's, no matter who's they are, kind of fly in the face of what you were saying earlier in this thread.

Or the 38th for all we know........I would say "we finally get to see a snake and it turns out to be the 1st-50th most venomous snake in the world!"

Even if some aussies are mislead about the relative toxicity of some of our animals, what does it matter? It isn't a competition you know.

 

[mmafan555]

Snakehandler

I actually made a thread 2 years ago and posted that article, or a similar one, the discussion/arguments we had in that thread were rather enjoyable for me. Most of the discussion revolved around the definitions of deadly, dangerous and venomous. Once we had worked out what the three terms meant there was little arguing... except when mmafan fan decided to revive the thread 2 years later.

Actually most people in the thread failed to work out what most venomous meant...hence why I bumped the thread. Their was also tons of wrong info/ comments even if the ld50 is very credible. According to the ld50 test Australia has 6 of the top 10 drop for drop...not 7,8,9,10 like some Aussies were claiming in the thread...And once again that is to mice and their are missing species of highly venomous snakes...specifically the Phillipine cobra, the Boomslang and 9 species of Bungarus( kraits).

Yes I through their was a need to specify most venomous to mice and most venomous to humans...I found alot of "Australia easily has the most venomous snakes" comments and they are both wrong and annoying. Therefore I felt the need to post in that particular thread.

Those LD50's, no matter who's they are, kind of fly in the face of what you were saying earlier in this thread.

How so?

Even if some aussies are mislead about the relative toxicity of some of our animals, what does it matter? It isn't a competition you know.

Well it does seem to be a competition to some Australians...It isn't for me and I am glad it isn't for you. In reality it doesn't matter...but I'm not going to pretend it isn't alittle annoying.

 

[waruikazi]

Have you even read the LD50's? Or your post that i quoted?

 

[$NaKe PiMp]

Actually most people in the thread failed to work out what most venomous meant...hence why I bumped the thread. Their was also tons of wrong info/ comments even if the ld50 is very credible. According to the ld50 test Australia has 6 of the top 10 drop for drop...not 7,8,9,10 like some Aussies were claiming in the thread...And once again that is to mice and their are missing species of highly venomous snakes...specifically the Phillipine cobra, the Boomslang and 9 species of Bungarus( kraits).

Yes I through their was a need to specify most venomous to mice and most venomous to humans...I found alot of "Australia easily has the most venomous snakes" comments and they are both wrong and annoying. Therefore I felt the need to post in that particular thread.






How so?




Well it does seem to be a competition to some Australians...It isn't for me and I am glad it isn't for you. In reality it doesn't matter...but I'm not going to pretend it isn't alittle annoying.

well as much as your annoyed,that is the way the world accepts the toxicity of snakes,and Australia has such an abundance of highly Neurotoxic snakes,which Neurotoxins being such a dangerous toxin to humans,as they can kill a human so swiftly,often before medical treatment is reached,and even then its not guaranteed of saving the patients life in the case of several Australian/Papauan species.

your just going to have to come up with a better coping strategy with your frustration over the scientific worlds acceptance of the lethality of Australian snakes,than hurling insults at something you clearly do not have a firm grasp on the concept of.
Its not something made up by Australians

time for a hug,and let you know everything is going to be Alright

 

[Snakeluvver2]

Hi
I can fly!
I can tell you I can fly
I can quote myself and others who have seen me fly!
No, I will not post evidence on anything or even half of what I have said!

 

[mmafan555]

well as much as your annoyed,that is the way the world accepts the toxicity of snakes,

I will repeat for the handicapped amongst us..No credible toxicologist accepts those tests for anything that isn't a mouse. And even if we were all mice they would still have plenty of flaws...and since we are humans the ld50 is an irrelevant joke of a test.

and Australia has such an abundance of highly Neurotoxic snakes,which Neurotoxins being such a dangerous toxin to humans,

Whipdee do!!! And what are Cobras, Mambas, Kraits silly? I could have sworn they were neurotoxic aswell? Virtually every other continent has highly neurotoxic snakes to and unlike in Australia they actullay kill people and pose a threat.( 1 a year for "dangerous" Australia)

Neurotoxins are usually more lethal than hemotoxins( through not always and it depends on the snake) but neurotoxic bites are also easier to treat. In many instances all you need a ventilator to survive a neurotoxic bite.. Good luck finding a similiar machine to save you if you have a bad hemotoxic bite.

Many so venomous aussie elapids aren't even primarily neurotoxic anyway.

as they can kill a human so swiftly,often before medical treatment is reached

Their is nothing "often" about dieing from an Australian snakebite.. More people die of snakebite in Spain than in Australia.......Of course the excellent medical treatment in Australia and easy access to plentiful antivenom plays a big role in that..but still

your just going to have to come up with a better coping strategy with your frustration over the scientific worlds acceptance of the lethality of Australian snakes,than hurling insults at something you clearly do not have a firm grasp on the concept of.

Nope... Like I said if the scientific community actullay accepted those tests than I would just agree with them..unfortunately they do not and its usually just butt hurt aussies who want to brag to the world about their "deadly animals" when in reality their animals are relatively lame...But like I said feel free to keep exaggerating your animals to tourists.

Its not something made up by Australians

Yes it kind of is...Just like the "Box Jellyfish is the worlds most venomous animal claim"

Of course as I have stated 500 times already.. The taipan very well could be the number 1 drop for drop snake to humans in potency but it also could be number 25 for all we know...And the true answer is that we haven't got anything more than a slight clue which snakes have the most drop for drop toxic venom to humans..and we probably never will.

The made up part is the "this is the 4th most venomous in the world" where as it should read " it is a very venomous snake that can cause death....describing the symptoms of a bite etc etc)

And if your ignorantly enough to take the ld50 for gospel...for God's sake atleast quote it accurately. Australia has 6 of the top 10 drop for drop ( of the snakes that were tested and some werent)...Not 7,8,9,10.... At-least get the damn test right if your going to use it.

time for a hug,and let you know everything is going to be Alright

Should I fly to Australia for that hug.?But oh wait..no I can't!!!! To many dangerous animals that kill 1 person every 10 years over in Australia..Omg .it's to dangerous! Maybe if you fly to America you can give me that hug, but I'm not going to Australia! To many deadly animals omg!!

 

[Cockney_Red]

Gotta take my hat off to your persistence mmafan, and for what its worth I agree with you, until we start testing venoms on the boat people, we will never know...

 

[mmafan555]

Hi
I can fly!
I can tell you I can fly
I can quote myself and others who have seen me fly!
No, I will not post evidence on anything or even half of what I have said!

I can fly...In fact I am flying next Thursday to South Carolina...But I cant fly to Australia because I will certainly get killed by an animal the instant I step off the plane!1 .As soon as my feet touch the group I will be killed by those horribly dangerous Australian animals.

No, I will not post evidence on anything or even half of what I have said!

What claim would you like me to provide evidence for? The Jellyfish claim? Sure that's should be fine... For the Taipan one...their obviously is no evidence for it being a particularly toxicity to humans( other than interrupting studies of bites) but I can post evidence that shows that different animals can react drastically different to a particular venom...and that thinking that an Inland Taipan is the most venomous to mice...automatically makes it the most venomous to other animals is wrong...

My claims about the Taipan were pretty mild in reality. All I said was it could be the number 1 drop for drop or it could be number 25 to humans.... I personally would bet it is definitely top 10( by looking at studies etc) but how it ranks in the top ten I haven't got a clue and neither do you or anyone else.

Gotta take my hat off to your persistence mmafan, and for what its worth I agree with you, until we start testing venoms on the boat people, we will never know...

Thats all I was ever arguing about the taipan or any other snake... People misconstrue words alot on here and its annoying... They were making it seem like I said the Taipan wasn't an unusually toxic snake and that it wasn't dangerous... Obviously it is a very very toxic snake to humans and is dangerous...I just said we can't be sure that it is number 1 like it probably is for mice. Thats it....How this is such a radical claim...I have no idea.

So to summarize my opinions on it.

Yes the Taipan is an unusually venomous and extremely venomous/dangerous snake to humans....With one of the highest untreated mortality rates in the world. It is highly likely that it is somewhere in the 1-10 range( both the coastal/papuan and the inland) but where it fits in that range excactly...I have no clue... It could very well be number 1,2,3 etc but I have no idea.

 

[Waterrat]

mmafan, you are simply unbelievable. I don't think in the history of APS have we seen such cynical knocker. We have a word for people like you but I would get infraction if I said it. Please don't ever come to Australia, stay where you are, take your medication and stay calm. There are other reptile forums, why don't you try them for a change?