Mindless Parroting and the “Karl Schmidt Analogy”

When discussing opistoglyphous snakes with other people, you will eventually have someone drop the dreaded “Karl Schmidt” analogy on you.

The analogy attempts to draw a parallel between the risk a contemporary keeper runs in getting bitten by a false water cobra, western hognose or baron’s racer to what happened to Dr. Karl P. Schmidt.  It attempts to romanticize the minimal risk that most of today’s rear fanged snake keepers face.

The Schmidt Analogy will be used on you at some point when discussing why commonly kept rear fangers probably will never cause a human fatality.  Here is an example of how The Analogy may be thrown in your face….

“Poo poo my assertion that you CAN die of a boiga dendrophilia bite all you want, but I don’t want to be the next…(insert dramatic pause here)…..KARL SCHMIDT!”

Or, another classic example…..

“So you don’t think that a false water cobra can kill you?  Well KARL SCHMIDT thought that boomslangs were harmless and look what happened to HIM!”

There are several problems with these statements, and “The Analogy” in general.

However before we breakdown the logical fallacy of this analogy, we should probably discuss who Dr. Karl Schmidt was and exactly what happened to him.

Dr. Karl P. Schmidt was an American herpetologist – arguably one of the most influential and important of the first half of the 20th century.  During his career he authored over 200 books and articles, served as the president of the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists and was the curator of amphibians and reptiles at Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History.   He was a leading expert on micurus – having described several subspecies of  dumerilii, dissoleucus, elegans, hemprichii, lemniscatus, nigroncinctus, etc.

In other words, he was no dummy.  He had an intimate knowledge of the animals he worked with – and was no stranger to venomous snakes.

On September 25, 1957 Dr. Schmidt was, along with Dr. Robert Inger; working with a young boomslang at the Field Museum.  In his own words, he described the bite that ultimately resulted in his death.

I took it [the boomslang] from Dr. Robert Inger without thinking of any precaution, and it promptly bit me on the fleshy lateral aspect of the first joint of the left thumb. The mouth was widely opened and the bite was made with the rear fangs only, only the right fang entering to its full length of about 3 mm.

The next day at 3 PM, Dr. Schmidt was dead of respiratory paralysis.  An autopsy report showed hemorrhaging in his lungs, renal pelvis and small intestine – all effects of the hemotoxic venom of the dispholidus typus that bit him.

Schmidt was noted as being a meticulous note taker and documented his reaction to the bite up until his death.  These are now generally referred to as his “death notes”.  These were later published by Clifford H. Pope, another famed herpetologist.

9:00 PM-12:20 AM Slept well. No blood in urine before going to sleep, but very small amount of urine. Urination at 12:20 AM mostly blood, but small in amount. Mouth had bled steadily as shown by dried blood at both angles of mouth.”

Pay attention, users of the Schmidt Analogy – in 1957, the toxicity of dispholidus typus venom was well established.  Dr. Schmidt was not dealing with an unknown factor here – for in 1940 Grasset and Schaafsma had documented the toxicity of  boomslang venom.

In other words, Dr. Schmidt was well aware that he had been bitten by a highly venomous snake. Any argument regarding a lack of knowledge as to the toxicity of the boomslang is therefore totally and completely invalid.

The problem was that Dr. Schmidt had incorrectly assumed that due to the age and temperament of the snake, and the characteristics of the bite, that he was not at risk.

Pope, in his comments that accompanied Schmidt’s published notes states.

That Dr. Schmidt’s optimism was extremely unfortunate is proved by his death, but it must be admitted that there was some justification: The boomslang was very young and only one fang penetrated deeply. However, almost two decades ago careful experimentation by Grasset and Schaafsma (South African Med. Jour., 1940, 14: 236-41) showed that boomslang venom has an extraordinarily high toxicity, even higher than those of such notorious snakes as cobras, kraits, and mambas. This fact alone dictates extreme caution in handling boomslangs of all sizes, even though they be among the most mild tempered of venomous snakes.

This is where the logic of the Schmidt Analogy fails.  Karl Schmidt was not dealing with an unknown snake of unknown toxicity.  The venom of the boomslang and it’s effects had been documented at least 17 years prior to his death.

The Schmidt Analogy relies on the ASSumption that Karl Schmidt was unaware of the potential lethality of a boomslang bite.

The Schmidt Analogy ASSumes that in 1957, the toxicity of boomslang venom was unknown.

The Schmidt Analogy is based on a lack of knowledge – specifically a lack of knowledge concerning the details of Dr. Schmidt’s death and a lack of knowledge as to what the herpetological world knew regarding the toxicity of dispholidus typus venom.

The Schmidt Analogy is an insult to Dr. Schmidt and is an example of internet pap run amok.  It is a prime exemplar of mindless parroting and how such parroting can eventually eclipse facts.

 

What’s Your Snake Packing?

Having witnessed the evolution of the reptile marketplace over the past three decades, I can say that the it has definitely made animals available to hobbyists faster than we can accurately learn about them.

I was one of those kids who was lucky/unlucky enough to purchase a Rhabdophis Tigrinus as a pet. Back in those heady days, they were just another brightly colored snake that was prominently displayed at the funky old reptile/aquarium store in the closest big city.

I blissfully kept that animal into it’s old age without knowing that it was almost every bit as deadly as a Dispholidus Typus (boomslang) until I was rearing it’s offspring. My mother had tangentially heard about a death attributed to tigrinus bite from overseas, but the story was fractured. Furthermore, without the convenience of today’s electronic media, any further investigation was near impossible.

Within the ever growing circle of opistoglyph afficionados, the Rhabdophis Tigrinus (and to a similar degree the Subminiatus) have achieved a level of mythical respect. In fact, when I bring them out to meet people, hands get shaky, lips quickly dry and chap and then get re-wetted, voices get slightly tremulous – the works.

It is fairly well known now that these snakes pack a potent venom that induces a fatal coagulopathy, which results in extensive hemorrhaging.

Today we know of a couple of opistoglyphous snakes that can pack a fatal punch (Dispholidus Typus, Thelatornis, Rhabdophis).

We also suspect that there are some that could potentially cause a serious, perhaps even life threatening envenomation (Select members of Philodryas, Macrophistodon, and select members of Psammophidae).

Now I often caution that information is a dangerous thing. Statements are incorrectly and vociferously stated, blogs read and the bad information is often gobbled up, and summarily absorbed in a manner that suits the fancy of the reader.

Philodryas Baroni and Heterodon Nasicus are examples of commonly kept opistoglyphs and the former belongs to the same family in which the Patagoniensis and Olfersii belong to. An Olfersii bite can be potentially life threatening……..while a Baroni bite will not. But do not tell that to the Baroni owner who is a careless reader, or who is trying to improve his cred on the net.

Same with the dispholidine family. Boomslangs and Twig snakes can kill, other members, Rhamnophis and Thrasops have not and probably will not. Yes, they pack a similar if not same venom, but the delivery system is worth about as much as a fart in a noisemaker. Just because you have a .45 caliber bullet in your pocket doesn’t mean you can kill someone with it. That bullet needs a delivery system.

I brought up Rhabdophis for a reason. I unknowingly was keeping an animal that could have perhaps killed me under the right circumstances. That was real.

I have kept other opistoglyphs over the years, wherein I was not spinning that same roulette wheel……Thrasops, Clelia, Rhamnophis, Hydrodynastes, other Philodryas species. etc.

I have kept some in which the jury is out – namely Rhamphiophis.

But one thing I do know, is that neither I nor the people I sold a Thrasops, Baroni, Hydrodynastes, Rhamnophis or Boiga to will become the next Karl Schmidt or Robert Mertens.

The notion is romantic enough, the photos of swollen hands and fingers is compelling. The idea that many of us are flirting with death by either envenomation or an almost unheard of and undocumented case of spontaneous opistoglyphous venom allergy on a daily basis is tempting……….and to some, perhaps romantic.

But once we get beyond the guessing and the what if’s, the research is not there. The history is not there. Where Mertens and Schmidt were pioneers in keeping (at the time) uncommon species, the keeper of a Boiruna Maculata is not. The bite accounts are often anecdotal and the claims of fatalities are the result of misinformation passed down from internet reader to internet reader.

The risk from this talk should be obvious. The practice of keeping captive reptile has been under threat from various special interests groups who have substantial pull with our legislatures on both the State and Federal levels. While you are not going to convince me that your hognose, mussurana or falsie can kill you, you may convince someone who will use that misinformation in a way that will put our freedoms as keepers at risk.

Know what your snake is packing, represent and discuss it in an ethical and responsible manner. It’s as much a part of being a responsible keeper as providing proper husbandry and veterinary care.