Venomoid animals

[DutchHerp]

AHHH

ok, if your correct, i see your point.
ok, thanks Matt.
lol sorry, im a slow learner.

Ah, no problem man.



Later, Matt

[Skiploder]

i get what he saying, even if the testes are removed, you can still "get it up" though...

Tell you what............

Give it a whirl.......if you can still get aroused afterwards I will buy you a donut and admit I was wrong.

Deal?

[FIEND_FO_LYFE]

Ah, no problem man.



Later, Matt

haha

Tell you what............

Give it a whirl.......if you can still get aroused afterwards I will buy you a donut and admit I was wrong.

Deal?

dude, hecks no.
im 18, and my mom wants kids... youd have to fight her for em lol

[4theSNAKElady]

I petted a leucistic cobra once at a show that was a venomoid....and that's all I'm going to say about that.

[icygirl]

There are some VERY cool hot snakes out there. Just because you have no interest does not invalidate that of others.

I didn't say that it's not valid to have an interest in hots. I recently saw some at a show, and they were some really unbelievable animals that can't compare to any other non-venomous. But there are so many hot-keepers out there who keep the venom intact. Even if I was in love with hots myself, if I'm not comfortable handling them, I'll leave it to the experts rather than forcing the snake through this procedure which may be harmful to it.

Comparing spay/neuter of mammals to removing venom glands is comparing apples and oranges. And for the record I don't support declawing cats or removing vocal cords of dogs.

[wilomn]

I didn't say that it's not valid to have an interest in hots. I recently saw some at a show, and they were some really unbelievable animals that can't compare to any other non-venomous. But there are so many hot-keepers out there who keep the venom intact. Even if I was in love with hots myself, if I'm not comfortable handling them, I'll leave it to the experts rather than forcing the snake through this procedure which may be harmful to it.

Comparing spay/neuter of mammals to removing venom glands is comparing apples and oranges. And for the record I don't support declawing cats or removing vocal cords of dogs.

Elective surgery that is not necessary, hence elective, is very comparable.

The fact that one prevents envenomation and the other prevents procreation puts them in exactly the same category, non-necessary invasive surgery to make it easier for humans to deal with the keeping of the creatures surgically altered.

[jparker1167]

As to the argument that venom plays no role in the digestion of prey items: that's based on an ASSumption - not any real scientific evidence. That ASSumption is a WAG - postulated because several species of venomous snakes will eat dead prey without it injecting it with venom.

no evidence, what about when venomous snakes are feed frozen and they digest the prey ? does that not prove that venom may help with digestion but may not be needed.

why should i have to prove that i can keep venomous and the person down the road can go out and get a dog that is known for attacking people. not that i think its the dogs fault. the owner should be responsible for their actions. if you cant handle the animal wait until you can.

[4theSNAKElady]

I think that memoving the venom glands is the same thing as declawing cats, or memoving the vocal cords of a dog. The animal is just surgically altered to make it "better" to manage it or easier for people to keep. People have been surgically altering dogs and cats for centuries, getting tails and ears docked and cropped. This practice is widely excepted, but not absolutely necessary. If enough people wanted to enjoy handling a venomous animal, which has been altered to be "less dangerous", it may be something that becomes more accepted or popular.Its just simply altering the animal for human use. It's not necessary at all, but it could still happen.

[Skiploder]

no evidence, what about when venomous snakes are feed frozen and they digest the prey ? does that not prove that venom may help with digestion but may not be needed.

Short answer:

Yes.

Long answer:

Vipers venoms, for example, are very rich in toxins that have a proteolytic mechanism - in other words they begin the digestion of proteins. These venoms are digestive fluids that begin their work outside of the body.

Other venoms - three fingers - for example, are used for prey immobilization only. They disrupt nerve transmissions and are inert in terms of digestive enzymes.

I believe there is a reason why vipers developed proteolytic enzymes in their venom. Does that mean that a viper cannot digest a meal if they are rendered a venomoid? Obviously, the answer is no.

On the other hand that doesn't prove that venom doesn't play a crucial role in digestion. The studies that have been done in this regard have been inconclusive and sometimes contradict each other.

For example - we know that these venoms are used for pre-digestion. What we haven't figured out is how the internal digestive process is adversely affected (sort and long term) if the venom is not utilized.

There seems to be another benefit of the snakes retaining their venom glands. There is some data on the anti-bacterial qualities of venom. During the process of digestion (which is temperature dependent) the snake can be at risk of baterial infection from bateria like E. coli and Pseudomona.


The existing studies have focused somewhat on digestion time - in other words does the envenomation speed up the digestion time. What hasn't been show is the quality of the digestion - does envenomation increase the efficiency of digestion in terms of utilization and absorption of useable nutrients.

The study that outlined the anti-bacterial properties of venom in digestion suggested that in some Australian elapids, envenomation actually increased the length of the digestive process.

So maybe the studies focusing on speed of digestion were missing the point - maybe not.