That's an interesting article.

I had to read the article twice to get myself past what at first appeared to be contradictions. One moment they are talking about snake venom causing excessive bleeding, and the next minute they are talking about mitigating excessive clotting with their new research. Threw me for a loop at first. Then they mentioned that their new treatment would work on cobra venom as well. And to the best of my knowledge, cobra venom is neurotoxic, not hemotoxic.

I did a little research, and sure enough, hemotoxic venom can cause EITHER excessive bleeding OR excessive clotting. I didn't know that. I thought that the only hemotoxic effect was excessive bleeding. And I also found out that while most cobra venom is indeed neurotoxic, there are sometimes a smaller contingent of hemotoxic components in cobra venom as well.

I'm glad somebody (obviously not me!) knows about these different snake venom effects and has come up with something promising to deal with them. Snakes have always fascinated me. But I don't like them. And I jump clear out of my skin when I see a snake, venomous or not. But they are still fascinating.

A new treatment technique for any problem is always welcome, but this one is a long way from market and practical use. It will be worthwhile to watch its development.
How many snake bite fatalities do we incur in the US annually? About a dozen, I believe. Opioid abuse is probably a more pressing concern.

We just had one about 15 miles from my house. A young, healthy and physically fit man. A tri-athlete. Rattlesnake. He died within hours.

This is a very, very rare occurrence though.

http://kdvr.com/2017/10/07/hiker-dies-hours-after-a-rattlesnake-bit-him-in-mt-galbraith-park/

The"report" leaves one wondering what sort of treatment was rendered before he reached the hospital. with good care, there well might have been a different outcome.

IMO the low rate of snakebite deaths (mortality) blinds people to the impact of survived snakebite injury (morbidity). You don't have to die from a snakebite for it to significantly mess up your life. So a therapy that minimizes tissue damage can have an enormously positive impact, even though the annual US death rate from snakebite is low.

Search "rattlesnake bite" on Google Images. The vast majority of those people survived, but they will carry a heavy economic/functional burden from the injury.

To me it's similar to the oft-quoted "you can live for 3 weeks without food" survival advice. Yes, most people can but the survivor will be so weak long before the 21 day mark that it can affect their ability to self-rescue.

My nephew, an avid hiker and climber, lives in CO and resided in Golden for several years. He says the trails and hills around there, where that fatality occurred, get a lot of foot traffic. He's seen a rattlesnake there once, so I guess they do avoid people if possible.

Googling rattlesnake bites, as RM suggested, results in some pretty horrible images. You might not have died but might wish you had. While there only 10-12 or so deaths a year from snakebite in this country, there are a total of 8000 venomous bites.

So, I'm glad I live up near Canada in the east. Lots of snow, nothing but garter snakes I've seen or heard of. I will happily take the snow. Snakes give me the creeps.

That is a general guide, and it is how long you can live without food. It does not pretend to address functional capabilities when going that long without food. In fact, some people will lose a great deal of functional capability after a few hours. Mostly in their cognitive abilities. It is the same for water, your cognitive impairment happens long before you die from lack of water. It also varies greatly from person to person. As a general guide to help people understand how to set priorities in a survival situation, it works.

Yes, indeed, your cognition can degrade due to lack of water. Don't ask me how I know this....