Thanks for the interesting comments. Thats what I love about this forum, members think for themselves.

Concerning dry or almost dry bites in Ron's study, all the victims had intense pain and all those who he got to after 30 minutes had localized swelling. Might I add that an ALMOST dry bite from a fer-de-lance is very dangerous! A puncture wound without venom would hurt but would not cause immediate intense pain, and swelling would take some time to develop through bacterial means.

The bite on my cat was definately not a dry bite. The site was just above the eye and to the right side of the face. The swelling I observed was rapid, the side of her face was swollen and the eyelid on that side had nearly turned inside out. The swelling had started to move up her neck and there was very little feeling in the upper neck and face. From my studies it seems swelling from snake bites takes at least a week and often longer before it starts to go down. Also when swelling is observed with snakebite it usually continues to progress for many days. The swelling in my cat stopped as soon as she was treated and proceeded to go down within a few hours. The next day she REALLY felt the follow up shot of vitamin C I gave her <img src="/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />, however she didn't feel the first one at all.

The report on the study that Ron did was given to me personally by him and was from the Department of Clinical Investigations, National Center of Tropical Medicine - extension Quito, Hospital Vonzandes, Quito Equador. I do not beleive it is available on the web and I have no knowledge as to weather it has been published in the US or not. I do not have his permission to distribute it without his consent, as I'm sure you can understand.

However there have been other studies published in the Oklahoma State Medical Association Journal July 1992, and June 1991. And comments in The Lancet July 26 1986. All of these showing very positive results from the treatment.

No further studies have been done in the US ( to my knowledge) seeing two have already been done. These lab studies were done on rats and mice who are the snakes natural prey and it is almost impossible to get a reaction that is not systemic in rats and mice. So the studies proved very effectively that this treatment doesn't work on rats and mice. This does not prove however, that it is not effective in much larger mammals and humans. All the studies that I have come across, which were done on humans, show that it does work. Also my personal experience, as well as the experiences of close friends show it to be very effective.

If the shock helps with the pain and swelling then that means it has to be working against the action of the venom in some form or fashion.

Refering to the links, the stun gun manufacturers did use the studies to try and generate sales; unfortunately that is the price we pay for living in a capitalistic society. It has no bearing on the effectiveness of the treatment, or on the integrity of the studies, which were in no way connected to any stun gun companies. Ron's study was done with a car coil connected to a 12 volt battery and some misc components which produced a constant, pulsed 15-18 kv with less than a milliamp of current.

Ron also told me that this treatment works on both haemotoxic and neurotoxic venom, although the study did not involve neurotoxic snakes. My and my friends experience has only been with haemotoxic snakes namely the Timber Rattler and Copper Head.

Ron used antivenom as well as the electroshock later on when antivenom was available (it usually was not) as well as large doses of antihistamine to counter allergic reactions to the antivenom. The study was done PRIOR to the antivenom being available. I assume his use of the antivenom was for protocol (legal) reasons, even though the shock therapy worked by itself.

Now I know most of us who go out into the woods will every now and then get stung by a bee or wasp at some time. So give it a try when you do, and prove it to yourself. The story which put Ron onto doing this was a medical journal article talking about a farmer who was very allergic to bee stings who shocked himself on an electric fence to stop his allergic reaction.

Ron tried it and used it because it worked for him. Not because he had stock in stun gun companies. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> he was out to save lives.

Thats why I and my friends have used it, simply because we tried it and it worked for us. I started out using the electric shock for bee and wasp stings which I am told have a very similar protein makeup to the venom of some snakes. The pain went away very quickly afterwards and any swelling started to subside (I get quite a large welt with bee stings) I also had none of the painful sensitivity to the sting area that with me hangs around for months afterward.