Talk:Spider bite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spiders, a collaborative effort to improve and expand Wikipedia's coverage of spiders. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.
A This article has been rated as A-class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Spiders To do:

Please put new materials at the bottom of the page, not up here.

Contents

[edit] Deletion

The notice of potential deletion was attached to this page before I had even finished assembling its parts. The assertion that the attribution of danger to certain spider species is subjective is not valid. It is precisely the purpose of this article to collect scientific evaluations and medical statistics on the likelihood of trauma or death upon being bitten by the spiders that have the more medically significant venom.

Since the notice was attached, I have attached 6 links to articles that offer objective evaluations. P0M 21:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

The values for Atrax venom amounts are greatly different, 140 mg. and 2 mg. The 140 mg. figure also indicates a spider capable of killing 5 large men. I suspect that it is off by a factor of 10. P0M 01:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect

I've just been looking for "poisonous spiders" on Wiki, and it took me some time to find this article. Shouldn't there be a redirect from "poisonous spiders"? Yes, I know that most/all spiders are poisonous to, say, insects, but a little bit of common sense would not go astray here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.43.16.78 (talk • contribs) .

Done; try out Poisonous spiders. --EngineerScotty 22:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I think "poisonous spiders" is a good redirect; I wouldn't move this article under that name; as it's technically incorrect (things which are poisonous are dangerous if you eat them or breathe them in; things which are venomous are dangerous if they bite or sting you). The original article title is the most accurate (all spiders are venemous except for a very few; just few are harmful to man), but it is clunky. My personal preference is to add information about spider fangs and the mechanics and ecology of biting, and rename this as "spider bites". But that's a bit of work. --EngineerScotty 05:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I think that is a good suggestion, and I am glad that this question will get some discussion before further changes are made. P0M 15:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Now requesting the move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move, although I recommend using the text on Wikipedia:Requested moves for creating a place for discussion on the talk page in the future. -- Kjkolb 09:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I am now requesting the move of this article to Spider bite; when this is done, I'll redirect Spider bites to spider bite. This move will require an admin to perform, as spider bite is an existing redirect. --EngineerScotty 23:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

  • As an interim step, I'm changing Spider bite to redirect here; so other links outside can be fixed. --EngineerScotty 23:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I fully concur with the need for the move. We've been much too patient with the alteration of the original title. "Spider bites" makes more sense to me, but I guess the "no plurals" rule will have to be obeyed. Otherwise I'd be tempted to try moving it to that title. P0M 06:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Eating spiders

Unable to find citation BUT, I have read and seen pictures and seen various documentaries on TV about people eating spiders. Yuck. In Southeast Asia some folks do eat large spiders. Yuck. But, if I was starving, that spider would likely look yummy. If someone can search better than I it should be possible to provide a reference to humans eating spiders. Yuck.

I would not want anyone to eat spiders. However, not only do some people eat spiders, they are said to be delicious.(Others say the people are delicious, but that's another food prejudice/preference question.) One of the leading academics of the seventeenth century, Anna Maria Von Schurman, was known for avidly eating spiders. John Compton says of her, on p. 180 of Life of the Spiders, "She said they tasted of nuts and justified her passion for them by saying she was born under the sign of Scorpio." Other people say that they taste like crustaceans. There are all kinds of food prejudices and all kinds of things that have allusive tastes that people eat for reasons that perhaps remain entirely unconscious to them. (Tootsie Rolls being one of them.) It also seems that there are genetic reasons for at least some food preferences. People can also learn to like tastes because of pleasant associated experiences. I disliked the taste of beer until I spent a day or two on a hot Pacific island and found how taste quenching a certain brand of draft beer could be. P0M 06:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bitten

Since I am here, I, the mighty Obbop, will briefly mention the three days of severe agony, pain, almost wishing I was dead while suffering horribly from a California Black Widow spider bite. Horrible!!!! And I am not a wimp. Hale and hearty in my prime while suffering terribly I understand how an infant or older person could die from that bite. Interestingly, I awoke the morning of the fourth day feeling better than I had in years. My senses were extremely acute; smell, taste, touch, hearing, even vision.... hard to describe but I hadn't felt that "vital" in years. By the end of the day I was back to normal. Some sort of "rebound" reaction? I have been sick before, injured semi-severely, but I never experienced that strange sense-heightened feeling from anything other than that spider bite. Heckuva' price to pay to experience it, though. Obbop told yah' this.

That's an interesting experience. One thing that happens to most if not all people is that our awareness of sensations is normally dulled by the way we generally spread our awareness -- both over peripheral stimuli that we devote a certain amount of attention to monitoring just for security reasons, and also over socially relevant (what that SOB said to me last night, for instance) matters that are not even present. A sudden diminution of drive states can redirect attention from events future and remote and open the doors of immediate perception a bit wider. A profound physical shock to the body, an experience that may not be consciously recognized as a near death experience, can have a similar effect -- anything that is not in the immediate environment falls out of awareness, presumably as not relevant to immediate survival. The housekeeping functions of the body tell the intellect to shut up for a while and attend closely to everything that is going on in the moment. As long as nothing noxious is present, being extra aware of the odor of roses, etc., can be very pleasant.
Come to think of it, there is a scene in The Last Samurai where one of the leading characters is dying of a self-inflicted sword wound. He looks out and sees snow flakes. He declares that every one of them is perfect. Ordinarily we attempt to see through the snow to the edge of the road, the tail lights of the car ahead, etc. P0M 06:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Now that this is moved...

the next stop is a GA nomination. Before we go before the GA folks, things which might be done to improve the article:

  • A few more references; I've added {{fact}} tags to a few claims which need sourcing. Also, the section on spider mouthparts could use some sources; could you add those, Patrick?
I'll see what I have on hand. Kaston's treatment, as I recall, is mainly diagnostic in intent, i.e., he says "Look for this characteristic shape," but he doesn't say why that shape is functionally important to the spider. It's like describing the exterior appearance of spinnerets without talking about their interior structure, why the spider can't just do with one or two of them, etc.
  • I propose removing the "key to bite severity". Number one, it's bordering on original research, as it's a key written by Wikipedia editors and not by arachnology or medical authorities. Number 2, it's redundant with the big table.
We didn't have it originally, but I thought it made a big improvement from the standpoint of the person who wonders whether to forbid the kids entry into the back yard because of the Argiope that has taken up residence there. If the spider didn't even make fourth string then Dad and Mom can forget about her. They are unlikely to navigate a chart and conclude that the weaver lass is effectively defenseless before humans.P0M
What I did do instead is note which spiders are confirmed (meaning the spider was positively identified, is believed to be the cause of death, there were no external complicating factors, and there is adequate documentation) to have killed people; this isn't OR. Only four general have confirmed kills--Loxosceles, Latrodectus, Phoneutria, and Atrax). Fortunately, I've none of those around my house (a shitload of hobo spiders, though, which I happily squash whenever I see them. The little bastards are fast). --EngineerScotty 05:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • A bit of spellchecking and other cleanup would be nice.
I've downloaded the software that lets me check from within the edit box. No problem.P0M
  • The article is a bit long; presently it's 51k. The information on specific species might be trimmed (all spiders mentioned have their own article other than the redback jumping spider; an article should be written for that). Also, an article on spider venom might be useful; there are lots of things which might go there. Some editing by a person knowledgeable in biochemistry or other related disciplines (i.e not me) might be helpful as well.
Definitely need a spider venom article. It never occurred to me that so many pharmocologists and people who study the nervous system would be interested in all these "prefabricated" neurochemicals. There is lots of neat stuff lying there ready to be discovered and used. P0M

Thoughts? --EngineerScotty 20:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm running out of time on some non-Wiki responsibilities, so I don't have lots of time to devote. One thing we probably all should be doing is collecting information and links to information on the various estimates of toxicity. It's pretty messy, primarily, I suppose, because each lab has its own way of calculating toxicity and the "paper" results can be off by an order of magnitude sometimes. We aren't wrong if we record that one lab has one figure and a second lab has another figure. BTW I wrote to the lab that overestimated the amount of venom of the Phoneutria spiders by an order of magnitude. I keep picturing a spider with a backpack loaded with venom, sort of the way a wolf spider carries her eggs around, but my dream endures along with the strange lab reports. If we could find information on the weights of spiders we could then point out that, e.g., their lab indicates that 10% of the spider's weight is carried in the form of highly toxic venom. I tried to back-envelope a figure by the number of bees in a three pound shipment, but it's been too many years to be sure whether its 50,000 per pound or 50,000 per three pound box. So that didn't work very well. P0M 01:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Obviously, take care of what you need to take care of in the real world; Wiki can wait. I'll dig up a few more sources, so I can remove the remaining {{fact}} tags. --EngineerScotty 05:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redback article

I couldn't help myself. I wrote a couple paragraphs on this much maligned spider. I have to agree with the guy who chewed us out a while back for even putting P. johnsoni in our article. I kept of of these spiders for a year, thinking that with all the hair burning going on in some web sites I would at least get to see some signs of aggressivity greater than that of other jumpers, but although the P. octopunctatus once bared her fangs at my coffee straw I never even saw a single threat display from the P. johnsoni -- even when she laid eggs and was tending them. (They weren't fertile, unfortunately.)

I've tried to word things so that I will not be guilty of "independent research." If need be I can probably go back and find letters from Dr. Vetter at UCR and some of the other Salticidae experts I've bugged. They all said, basically, that these spiders behave about like all the other Phidippus species, and (reading between the lines) if you get bitten its probably your own fault.

Take a look to see whether anything can be better NPOV'd. P0M 02:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Venomous animals tag

A spider bite is not a venomous animal, rather the unfortunate result of an encounter with one. Therefore, I suggest that the "Venomous animals" category tag be removed from this article. --Jwinius 15:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

To me this proposal seems analogous to my attempts to calculate results in physics lab where measurements were made with a wooden meter stick to more than three decimal points. P0M 07:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, then the category should have been called something else, or its description should be altered. --Jwinius 10:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
The article has had several titles including "dangerous spider." It is often not easy to please everybody. Following the rules on article titles sometimes makes for strange results, too.
The purpose of category tags is to give people one more way that they may can find what they are looking for. Sometimes people want to know what kinds of animals use venom. The tag would help them find the "spider" article (indirectly) while giving them information on the venoms, their methods of delivery, etc. Sometimes people want to know something about what would happen to them if they were bitten by a venomous animal, and the tag would get them directly to spiders and their venom.
What would you like to nominate as an appropriate category? "Animal envenomation"? "Envenomation by animal"? Do the other articles that are put under this category concern only the animal and its venom? Or do they, too, have something to say about the results of human envenoation? P0M 06:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pictures..

this article is about spider bite and i didn't see a single picture showing what a spider bite could look like.. :( 75.15.183.89 16:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed--Where are the pictures?!!65.183.135.231 (talk) 18:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism Corrected

We were told that "some spider species have bites which are known to be made of pure lava. . . ." Yeah, right. Kostaki mou 04:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, at least the perp exhibited some imagination. :-) P0M 04:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The lead-in

The lead-in to this article is currently "Spiders occasionally bite humans. The symptoms of their bites can include necrotic wounds, systemic toxicity, and in some cases, death." I think we should mention that the vast, vast majority of spider bites cause no symptoms or, at most, a small bump on the skin: this lead-in gives the impression that the majority of the 37,000 species of spiders are dangerously venomous. --Hyperbole 10:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kudos

On this very interesting article! A great example of WP. Where did the GA work go? Anchoress (talk) 10:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)