Hey Aardwolfe, You have misunderstood the theory about the action of the electrical charge on the venom. The tissue is not affected at all, it is the venom that is changed in it's molecular structure and the ionic charge that is modified by the shock. A recent study in Italy found that electric shock inactivated the Phospholipase A2 and Metalloproteinase molecules which are aparently the cause of pain and damage in snake venom.

Now on to the darwin award winner. I am somewhat familiar with the case of the guy that you mention. That guy was a nut, he used excessively high voltage, pulsed at too high a frequency (3000 rpm on the car... I shake my head in disbelief) and he hard wired himself to the vehicle for 5 minutes. So he didn't treat himself as the program in Ecuador treated people, so it is very difficult to compare the two. There is no way to determine what damage was done by the extreme misuse of the electricity, there was tissue damage and systemic shock from the electricity and he was rendered unconscious by using inappropriate shock. We can't determine if the venom was deactivated by the misadministered shock or not. The administration of the anitvenom was routine when there was a mild lack of clotting of the blood. There should have been severe lack of clotting of the blood if the venom had been largely untouched by the shock. He had major complications to the antivenom which is rather a common occurrence.

All In all, there is not any way that anyone can draw significant conclusions about the effectiveness of properly administered HVDC shock on snake venom from this case. It is quoted popularly because it is sensational and that is all.

So we have one guy here where we aren't sure what happened or didn't, and we have 1000+ people in Ecuador alone who are alive because of the Appropriate and Effective use of HVDC first aid. It is a bit one sided. Not to mention the people who I know who have used it for snake venom, bee stings and spider bite.... with great success. I have correspondance with people who are very allergic to stings and after using appropriate devices the pain and swelling went down and no allergic shock occurred. Also the missionaries who use this type of thing don't like to shock people, they use it because it works against the venom which they have no other way of treating. It is only in the west where we have doctors who administer antivenom worth 25,000 USD per bite incident where it is claimed it doesn't work and where most won't try it. Those who do try it find that it works, and use it, it's as simple as that. Doctors Stan Abrams, Carl Osbourne, Ron Guderian to name three in the US have tried it and found it effective against snake bite and other bites and stings too.

The BBC article really doesn't say anything significant, it is just parroting off what most doctors say who haven't tried it. These are the same doctors who can't agree about use of extractors or pressure bandages etc.

Most of the literature that the "researchers" quote on this very obscure subject is either misleading or downright false. There is a need to have effective and credible research done on this subject, and at this point it hasn't been done because it is verrrry expensive and most research in US medicine is paid for by very large pharmecutical companies. Individual doctors cannot afford to foot the bill, and it can't be done credibly in a garage.

There are lots of airheaded medical people on the web who parrot off what other inexperienced people have written on the subject saying that it either doesn't work or there isn't enough evidence and so just don't do it. I agree that there should be much more research done in an appropriate manner with an open mind. But I disagree that there is not enough evidence to show that it is effective, I know differently.

Cheers,
Mac.