Talk:Latrodectism

Medicine: Dermatology / Toxicology Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Dermatology task force.
	This article is supported by the Toxicology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Spiders Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spiders, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spiders on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpidersWikipedia:WikiProject SpidersTemplate:WikiProject SpidersSpiders articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Latrodectism.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Treatment

So the treatment section urges us to seek out medical treatment, but then says that they can't really do anything? Uh, ok. -Rolypolyman 21:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that in circumstances where there is no direct treatment, often an emergency room can help manage things like pain, renal failure, etc. --Pballen 07:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused about the source they use to "prove" that people recover just as fast with placebo as antivenom. That doesn't seem to be what the source says at all and it's not even about widow spider venom. --some anonymous person — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.118.44.180 (talk) 21:58, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I addded in the ref "Randomized Controlled Trial of Intravenous Antivenom Versus Placebo for Latrodectism: The Second Redback Antivenom Evaluation (RAVE-II) Study" https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.06.006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moderntarantula (talk • contribs) 07:25, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

There's a useful source here. --99of9 (talk) 02:11, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Risk of anaphalaxis.

Here in Oztralia, we have a few spiders now rated as "non-venomous". However, recent studies have shown that whilst the venom may not be fatal or even that toxic, it can frequently causes anaphalaxis, which of course often is both. Does this also happen with bites from this spider? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.135.252 (talk) 06:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A: anaphylaxis is possible, but is not reported. So while hundreds of bites occur annually in Oztralia, no anaphylaxis has occurred. That would put it as rare. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moderntarantula (talk • contribs) 22:53, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

The edit for increasing death rates in the Hun and elderly, need data. The current data says the death rate is imperceptible . The complication rate appears lower in children at least in Australian children bitten by redbacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moderntarantula (talk • contribs) 23:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No information from Africa?

Is there no good information about the envenomation effects of various African Latrodectus species? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:41, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]