- Joined
- May 7, 2005
- Messages
- 731
I'm surprised to see people i do well respect posting quite some rather mediocre statements here.
Check the sources cited by Wikipedia, e.g. Vetter, the article is publicly available.
To quote from it:
Venom Toxicity and Risk. Barth (2001) lists experience with bites by C. salei, C. getazi, C. coccineus and C. panamensis Lachmuth, Grasshoff and Barth with minimal symptom development. One bite by C. coccineus resulted in intense bee sting-like pain during fang penetration, and significant pain and numbness for the first 10 min or so, becoming asymptomatic within 30 min (Barth 2001).
Sources for the corresponding quotes out of the publications cited are given in the original paper.
Some people here seem to be on some kind of witch-hunt?
Cupiennius is harmless, the genus is not known to possess medically significant toxicity.
For a private keeper to my opinion even more important: these spiders are extremely hesitant to bite, even if given reason to do so.
Check the sources cited by Wikipedia, e.g. Vetter, the article is publicly available.
To quote from it:
Venom Toxicity and Risk. Barth (2001) lists experience with bites by C. salei, C. getazi, C. coccineus and C. panamensis Lachmuth, Grasshoff and Barth with minimal symptom development. One bite by C. coccineus resulted in intense bee sting-like pain during fang penetration, and significant pain and numbness for the first 10 min or so, becoming asymptomatic within 30 min (Barth 2001).
Sources for the corresponding quotes out of the publications cited are given in the original paper.
Some people here seem to be on some kind of witch-hunt?
Cupiennius is harmless, the genus is not known to possess medically significant toxicity.
For a private keeper to my opinion even more important: these spiders are extremely hesitant to bite, even if given reason to do so.
Last edited: