Page 81 |
Witness to the History of Australian Medicine |
|||
Table of Contents
Venomous Country Participants Venomous Country Endnotes Index Search Help Contact us |
Venomous Country (continued) Ken Winkel: I think you will be interested in something I came across. Struan was a great collector and we've heard how he was meticulous in collecting, filing and marking so many documents. So much of his lifestyle was documented. This one I came across was in his file on notes relating to the early treatment of snakebite. To exemplify the early twentieth century recommendations for the management of snakebite, we have a letter here to John Graydon who was instrumental in the first antivenom and who worked all the way up to the 1960s from the 1930s at CSL.[60] This letter was to Dr Graydon from a person who seems to be a General Practitioner in 1967 pertaining to early management of snake bite. This particular doctor, Dr Shannessy, writes; 'Dear Dr Graydon, There's another case, but it's not quite so interesting. [Laughter] He is particularly talking about the value of using permanganate; 'A snake bite usually occurs a long way from antivenom and bush folk place great credence in tourniquet, often badly applied, and Condy's. A slough due to treatment is nothing if it saves life. The lethal dose of snake poison treated with potassium permanganate or other chemical before injection does not cause death. There may be some rationale in infiltration. Personally, I always thought that snake venom was taken up by the tissues and the lymph during the application of the tourniquet. Surely there are less irritating chemicals that destroy snake venom produced by infiltration at the same time as the tourniquet. I would like to see Dr Wiener but I am busy...and so on. Many thanks for your letter. I am sure you will enjoy the episode of the young parson. After all, it happened to someone else' [Laughter] So perhaps we might ask Peter. As someone who's physically had to use pressure immobilisation on themselves or had it applied, do you recall how things were amongst the herpetologists before, and then immediately after, Struan publicised his work. What was the teaching before that, and the impact of the change in approach? Peter Mirtschin: As I said before, Struan's work was pretty widely publicised. Most of the herpetologists who kept snakes were aware of Struan's pressure-immobilisation method of first aid in one way or another. The first time I had to use it was after an inland taipan bite. This was very shortly after the toxicity of that venom was publicised and, having been bitten by this species, I thought to myself that I was the first person known to have been bitten by an inland taipan, apart from the guy who was involved in its discovery. So I applied the first aid myself and then I jumped in my car and drove myself to hospital. Now, that's a subject all on its own and I'm open to valid criticism for driving after being bitten. By the time I got to the hospital and was lying down, I had started to feel the effects of the venom. In my opinion, the first aid was beneficial in that case. I went on later and used it a number of other times - after a death adder bite and a rough-scaled snake bite. In all those cases I believe it worked for me. Photograph courtesy of Ann Wetsmore Struan was a wonderful communicator and I think most herpetologists knew of this pressure-immobilisation technique because of all the publicity that he attracted at this time, and still does even today. You'd probably go a long way to find a herpetologist dealing with dangerous snakes in Australia who is not aware of the first aid method. I started accumulating a large collection of snakes about the time pressure-immobilisation was replacing the use of tourniquets.
© The University of Melbourne 2005-16 Published by eScholarship Research Centre, using the Web Academic Resource Publisher http://witness.esrc.unimelb.edu.au/081.html |