Quote Originally Posted by daniel1983 View Post
People always argue the fact that monitors are venomous.....Dr. Fry does great research...however, I think he should have coined a new term instead of stating that monitors are venomous. I don't like to use the term venomous when talking about monitors. They are not venomous like rattlesnakes or cobras.....more like western hognose snakes. Not many people talk about hognoses as 'venomous'....

The venom of ANY monitor is not enough to kill a person.

However, the small amount of venom in a monitor bite does make a bite feel a little different than that of 'non-venomous' reptiles. I have been bitten by monitors numerous times. The only difference in 'feel' between a small monitor bite and a ball python bite is....the monitor bite bleeds more and is sore afterward. It has to do with the anticoagulant properties of the small amount of "venom" contained within their saliva.

Although the 'venom' amount is in extreamly small amounts with all monitors....the larger the monitor, the larger the bite. Of course large monitor bites will be bad.

A bite from a Komodo, water monitor, croc monitor, or any other larger monitor is going to be horrible with or without "venom"....In my opinion, there would be little difference between being bitten by a 6-7' long monitor than there is getting bit by a 6-7' alligator...they both bite hard and cause deep wounds. With monitors however, there is the small amount of 'venom' in their bite....it makes the wound bleed more and hurt more. Ask Dr. Fry. He has trouble using one of his hands due to a Lace monitor bite....his problems did not occur from any 'venom'....the physical bite damaged his hand so much that function was lost. They are BIG animals.

.....I really think that one day people will use Dr. Fry's research to impose some sort of legislation against monitor keepers....all because they were labeled 'venomous'.
Well then we can agree that while not as dangerous to humans as the venom from what we would consider a true "hot", they do contain glands that produce "bioactive secretions" that are used to immobilize their prey. It's still venom and while it's not as evolved as that of an elapid and the delivery system is much more primitive, it technically serves the same purpose.

Whether or not people decide to legislate restrictions of ownership of these animals based on the fact that they do produce a venom - albeit one of no significant consequence to an adult human - is a topic that deserves it's own thread.