356
FINDLAY E. RUSSELL
with envenomations by fishes. I am distressed to note that in most
cases the non-professional advice has not only proved to be more
effective, but often more rational. Much of the advice given in texts
devoted to tropical medicine, where the problem of venomous animal
injury is most often discussed, stems from the false and antiquated
idea that all venoms are related chemically, and thus all respond to
similar therapeutic measures. From the early studies on snake venoms a
number of remedies found their way into the therapeutics for venomous
marine animal injuries. Among these were alcohol, formaldehyde,
urine, potassium permanganate, ammonia, gold salts and cassava
bread. While all these measures have been found to be ineffective,
some are still advised in an occasional medical text. The more recent
fads for antihistamines, corticosteroids and ice water as I ‘ shotgun ”
therapeutic methods are slowly waning fortunately for the patient.
One cannot help from reaching the conclusion, after studying the many
hundreds of experiments that have been done with various drugs for
the treatment of venomous animal injuries, that the test tube is a
rather naive human being.
It is refreshing to find that a thorough review of the literature
for the past several centuries often reveals a highly effective method
of treatment, based on trial and error. When I suggested (Russell and
Emery, 1960) that the use of hot water in weeverfish stings might be
effective I did so on the basis of its very effective use in stingray and
scorpionfish injuries, and on the basis of a limited number of case
histories and observations on weeverfish stings that I studied in
England, France and Holland during 1958. Subsequently, I reviewed
the quite extensive earlier literature on this problem and found a great
number of statements concerning the effectiveness of heat, in one form
or another, in the treatment of weeverfish poisonings.
Gressin (1884), for one, notes that “ one could, following the
custom of the fishermen of the Channel, put the stricken member in a
bath of hot milk, which, according to their saying, calms its admirably.’’
Evans (1921) notes “ that the fishermen have acted on the line of heat.
The most frequent remedy is to plunge the part into boiling vinegar ;
another plan is to hold the affected limb over the funnel of the boiler
which, in a smack, drives the donkey engine.” Patrick Russell (1758)
states that fishermen in the German Sea often apply tt very hot poultice
to the wound, which is a “ most efficacious cure ”. Similar reports
on the use of heat for this type of injury have been noted in the papers
of more recent workers.
In controlled experiments in humans we have recently found that
the methods suggested for the treatment of stingray injuries are
FINDLAY E. RUSSELL
with envenomations by fishes. I am distressed to note that in most
cases the non-professional advice has not only proved to be more
effective, but often more rational. Much of the advice given in texts
devoted to tropical medicine, where the problem of venomous animal
injury is most often discussed, stems from the false and antiquated
idea that all venoms are related chemically, and thus all respond to
similar therapeutic measures. From the early studies on snake venoms a
number of remedies found their way into the therapeutics for venomous
marine animal injuries. Among these were alcohol, formaldehyde,
urine, potassium permanganate, ammonia, gold salts and cassava
bread. While all these measures have been found to be ineffective,
some are still advised in an occasional medical text. The more recent
fads for antihistamines, corticosteroids and ice water as I ‘ shotgun ”
therapeutic methods are slowly waning fortunately for the patient.
One cannot help from reaching the conclusion, after studying the many
hundreds of experiments that have been done with various drugs for
the treatment of venomous animal injuries, that the test tube is a
rather naive human being.
It is refreshing to find that a thorough review of the literature
for the past several centuries often reveals a highly effective method
of treatment, based on trial and error. When I suggested (Russell and
Emery, 1960) that the use of hot water in weeverfish stings might be
effective I did so on the basis of its very effective use in stingray and
scorpionfish injuries, and on the basis of a limited number of case
histories and observations on weeverfish stings that I studied in
England, France and Holland during 1958. Subsequently, I reviewed
the quite extensive earlier literature on this problem and found a great
number of statements concerning the effectiveness of heat, in one form
or another, in the treatment of weeverfish poisonings.
Gressin (1884), for one, notes that “ one could, following the
custom of the fishermen of the Channel, put the stricken member in a
bath of hot milk, which, according to their saying, calms its admirably.’’
Evans (1921) notes “ that the fishermen have acted on the line of heat.
The most frequent remedy is to plunge the part into boiling vinegar ;
another plan is to hold the affected limb over the funnel of the boiler
which, in a smack, drives the donkey engine.” Patrick Russell (1758)
states that fishermen in the German Sea often apply tt very hot poultice
to the wound, which is a “ most efficacious cure ”. Similar reports
on the use of heat for this type of injury have been noted in the papers
of more recent workers.
In controlled experiments in humans we have recently found that
the methods suggested for the treatment of stingray injuries are