Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Greg,
To answer your question, it may be more on the ignorance side. I am no scientist, nor a venom researcher. My main point is that posting topics like this do far more harm than good. One may interpret that bite as a very harmful envenomation and want to ban hognose. They want to ban everything these days. No need to feed their fire.
I agree that hognose snakes do commonly bite and a small percentage have reactions to their saliva. These reactions are just allergic reactions and not true envenomations. Whether their saliva contains toxins or not, maybe I shouldn't make statemens without a PHD to back it. I am sure if one examines the saliva of every North American colubrid, they may find the same properties they consider venom in hognose in other non fanged harmless species. My point was simply that they don't inject venom from a gland causing a typical envenomated bite.
On venom, while I am by far no expert on all the snakes you mentioned, I am pretty sure boomslangs have groved fangs conected to venom glands. Everyone envenomated by a boomslang typically has the same reaction. Most hognose snake victims have the same reaction which is nothing more than a couple of holes in their skin. A small percentage have allergic reaction. I don't think you can compare the bite, venom, or venom delivery system, but I may be wrong.
On their fangs, whether the toad popping theory was debunked or not, they are teeth, they are serrated, and they do pop toads. I've witnessed this myself. Yes, they do move independantly and these snakes do eat other things like other amphibians, fish, and rodents that don't puff up. They move independantly to aid in getting these things down the hatch. They are also designed to do a good amount of damage and to keep things from escaping.

Again, my main point is just to be careful what you post. There is nothing wrong with warning people about the risks of owning a hognose snake. I warn of this very same thing when I sell to newbies. I just think one may read the post in question and believe that hognose snakes have some kind of control of their "venom" and that they may be injected full of it if they are penetrated by their "fangs" that's all. I also just wanted to make a point that if it is clasified as a venom and if one may consider them to have fangs, neither are intened as a typical venomous defence mechanism as in most venomous snakes, front or rear fanged.
I don't want to call anyone stupid and God knows I am not a know it all. I do know if kingsnake, snake shows, or fedex classified hognose snakes under rear fanged venomous snake section, none of us would be happy about it.

Good post.

I agree!!
With all the nutjobs on the left screaming at every chance they get, we don't need to give them ammunition.
Any incident will be distorted.
It is not just about having sensible factual discussions.
They will use every opportunity to destroy our hobby.

Of course I have a bias as a breeder selling snakes.
However, while it is important to have a frank discussion with a potential customer about the various aspects of hognose ownership, it still remains true that the risk of being dangerously hurt by a hognose snake remains insignificant.

My main point is that posting topics like this do far more harm than good. One may interpret that bite as a very harmful envenomation and want to ban hognose.

I couldn't disagree more. Postings such as mine do more good than harm, maybe not for the industry, but certaintly in educating the public who in my mind is far more important anyways. I can't think of anything worse than not informing someone of the potential risks of buying a hognose snake and then having them get bitten and having a severe reaction, something that might cause them to miss work or having to go to the hospital. To ignore the facts and pass off misinformation such as you have done is in fact far more damaging than anything I have shown with my factual bite post. For one, it shows that you do not know the facts. Two, it shows that you might be willing to disavow any such factual findings in fear that it's merely going to hurt the your ability to keep and sell such animals, therefore you might have a vested interest in lying to the public or at least obfuscating the facts. If a government agency is going to want to ban something, then they are going to do it based on their own research, not because of posts such as mine.

What I stated was factual, Western hognose are in fact rear-fanged (meaning, they actually possess fangs) and venomous. These facts are clearly documented and can be found with even just a little research on the internet. Here's some information that I looked up in less than 5 minutes...

US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health - "The present study characterized venom (Duvernoy's gland secretion) collected from twelve species of opisthoglyphous (rear-fanged) colubrid snakes, an extremely diverse assemblage of non-venomous to highly venomous snakes. Most venoms displayed proteolytic activity (casein), though activity levels varied considerably. Low phosphodiesterase activity was detected in several venoms (Amphiesma stolata, Diadophis punctatus, Heterodon nasicus kennerlyi, H. n. nasicus and Thamnophis elegans vagrans), and acetylcholinesterase was found in Boiga irregularis saliva and venom, but no venoms displayed hyaluronidase, thrombin-like or kallikrein-like activities."
Link

In case you might have missed this one very important fact from the above quote, Western Hognose are part of the Opisthoglyphous family, colubrids that are rear-fanged. Here's some more literature on the Opisthoglyphous family. Did you also notice that the above quote came from a US government site?

"Opisthoglyphous snakes (rearward grooves) possess venom injected by a pair of enlarged teeth at the back of the maxillae which normally angle backwards and are grooved to channel venom into the puncture. Since these fangs and are not located at the front of the mouth this arrangement is vernacularly called rear-fanged. In order to envenomate prey, an opisthoglyphous snake must move the prey into the rear of its mouth and then penetrate it with its fangs, presenting difficulties with large prey although they can quickly move smaller prey (or a human handler's finger) into position. The opisthoglyphous dentition appears at least two times in the history of snakes.[1] While the venom of most opisthoglyphous snakes is too weak to harm humans, sometimes this is not the case. Notably, herpetologists Karl Schmidt and Robert Mertens were killed by a boomslang and twig snake, respectively, after each underestimated the effects of the bite and failed to seek medical help. Opisthoglyphous snakes are found in family Colubridae."
Link

Here's a couple more pictures that clearly show the fangs of Hognose snakes...

Are hognose envenomations going to kill anybody? Well, it hasn't happened yet, so I don't think we really have to worry about it. But then again, that's not the point at all, is it? To me, the point is educating people so that they can make informed decisions on the type of pet they are wanting to invest in. If they choose to pass on owning a hognose snake simply because of them being rear-fanged and mildly venomous, then that's their decision as it should be, their decision based on knowing the facts! Nobody wants to buy a snake, then get bit, have a severe reaction like what I had and not be able to go to work that involves complete and unhindered mobility of their hands. If anything, my informing them of the potentials of such a bite actually might prevent a bite from happening because it will hopefully cause the keeper to be a lot more cautious when handling and not be so lackadaisical when handling (like I was when I got bit this last time).

Trust me when I say this, I don't take the situation lightly, especially considering I have 7 years of my life and over $50k invested in my hognose collection alone, so legislation banning me from keeping or selling them would be a huge step backwards for me. But here's the thing, it's far more responsible and selfless of me to at least show and educate people about the inherent risks than not to simply because of my own self interests. To me, disregarding factual information and not passing it along to the public, potentially putting them in harm, is just wrong no matter how you look at it.

Anywho, now you know the actual facts, and there's a lot more information out there at your fingertips if you truly are interested in looking it up. Every one should know the facts and share them with others so that they can make informed decisions on whether or not this is the right species of snake for them to keep, it's just the responsible thing to do.
-----
Troy Rexroth
Rextiles

I really think I have made my point whether it sunk in or not. If not here it is. Hognose snakes are harmless, they should not be classifies with other dangerouse species, and allergic reactions can be compared to that of a non fanged harmless snake such as a garter snake or a water snake. My point is the words "venom" and "fangs" scare people. I am not talking about potential buyers. I do my part in disclosing the risks of bites and reactions. I am talking about the general public. I do believe those teeth can be considered fangs, but they are in fact teeth. I also know they have anticoagulant properties that may be classifies as venom but it is much less harmful than that of a common spider or a honey bee. People have reactions to just about anything in this world. I would say that hognose saliva is the least of our worries. Education never hurts though.

Again, this is gone crazy and makes me wonder about how folks use "information" and context. And if you believe everything on the internet, your in trouble.

Saliva of humans, causes a nasty bite and often, cats, dogs etc, cause the same. Friggin catfish can bite or poke the crap out of you.

I will quote my wife, if it has a mouth, it can bite. Oh yea, last week a 2ft female hog in the field, used it false striking and buffing ability and it worked on her. It got away without a picture, but an old can to make the spot and going to get me(out in the bush) we did get our pictures and information.

I guess theres lots of people in the world and I am the total opposite of Troy. I have had 11 rattlesnake bites, 3 were hot. The last two, I did nothing. The last one, I went back to work. None hurt in any way, the first really had swelling, my arm was a balloon, the last two were about like Troys. I have been bitten by a million rear fanged and other colubrids, including hogs and huge lyresnakes, without any symptons what so ever. A a million varanid bites with are known to carry croto toxin. And some like Kings pygmy monitors, will make you dance. Apparently, I like to dance.

I also ride a Harley, now that is dangerous. Oh and cars, hmmmmmmmmm they will kill you.

The advice is easy, keep your hands or other body parts out of their mouths(If it bothers you).

As most would say here, If they ban them, I would still keep them. And that is what happens when there are friggin too many laws, the laws themselves become weak and useless.

You all know Australia has tons of laws in this area, funny thing is, in the outback(99%) of Oz. No one gives a damn.

Its funny with English rule, everything fun is illegal, yet the English run around the world having fun.

I am sorry Troys hand reacted like it did, but seriously, its up to him to carry on or not. As it is with the rest of us.

Kingorum bites are very painful. Never thought such a little varanid can have such a painful bite. LOL.

And as far as Harleys go, put loud pipes on and they become less dangerous. LOL

2001 Soft Tail.

Is that your bike? nice. heres mine, Its modified for herping. Four LED lites turn night into day, extra fuel, lifted and more. Now I am installing a Cobra fuel management system, as stock computers suck. Once its over 100F out here, it leans out so much, it pings all the time. Can't have that.
Its in situ. just after doing some mud bogging and off road work. Them dang hogs don't make it easy.

If your still interested, have more new pics and field stuff. Thanks and nice bike.

Mr. Frank,
You know I am always interested in your photos and field observations. They are always interesting and informative. So please, post away.

Cool bike by the way Frank. The fact that it is used for herping makes it even cooler. Cant do that on a crotch rocket.

To use the word "Venom" in the traditional sense. The one,which the general public understands by the way, is misleading in my opinion, when it comes to hogs. If they had this kind of venom, most or all of the people they bite would have a bad reaction. But with hogs bites, it seems the other way around. Why is this? Allergic reaction, someone's body chemistry, etc. Hogs have a weak venom if you will. But it is so weak as to not really warrant the word. To put hogs and Boomslangs in the same sentence or compare them is not fair. Hogs are basically harmless. Boomslang venom can kill a person. It's good to warn people of the possible reactions one might have if bit. I agree. But most people will not have this reaction. So if a hog bites someone and that person has no reaction whatsoever, is it really "Venom"? Just something to think about.

I don't think it's misleading at all Mike. Venom is venom regardless of how potent or dangerous it is.

Let's look at the definition of the word venom:

"ven·om
[ven-uhm]noun
1. the poisonous fluid that some animals, as certain snakes and spiders, secrete and introduce into the bodies of their victims by biting, stinging, etc."

In this case, we're talking about the injection of a foreign fluid that causes a negative reaction when introduced into the body of another animal. Pretty simple really. If a hognose has the ability to do this, whether that's by "toxic saliva" or actual venom, as has been proven to exist in hognose, then by all means, it's a venomous snake solely by definition alone.

"It's good to warn people of the possible reactions one might have if bit. I agree. But most people will not have this reaction. So if a hog bites someone and that person has no reaction whatsoever, is it really "Venom"?"

The real question is, was the person actually envenomated and if they were, did they suffer a reaction from the venom? Look at all of the people who have had dry bites from lethal venomous snakes and then think they are "immune" based on the ignorance that they were not envenomated at all.

There was a show on Animal Planet (I know, I know, the worst channel when it comes to anything factual about animals... ) about people that owned dangerous/venomous snakes, I forget what it was called. Anywho, there was a girl who got into keeping non-venomous snakes which escalated to her keeping venomous. As the story goes, she had a Gaboon Viper that she often let loose around the house because she had been dry bitten several times and believed she was immune to the snakes venom until one day the snake bit and envenomated her which resulted in a horrible death. While this girl was obviously a bit "out there" and completely ignorant of what dry bites were, had she been properly educated and known about the effects of actual envenomation, perhaps she would still be alive today, or perhaps not. Who knows?

Let's look at rattlesnake bites. Some people get bit and die, some get bit and lose an appendage, others might suffer lesser effects that result in neither loss of life or limb. Some might even get a dry bite and not suffer anything at all other than a puncture wound. The lesser of these effects doesn't mean that the rattlesnake should be considered anything less than a venomous reptile should it? Of course not.

This in turn doesn't mean that we should alter the terms for hognose either. All it means in relation to hognose is that we can deem them as Mildly Venomous and be content that this is by far more truthful than ignoring the fact that they are potentially venomous at all.

But again, venom is still venom. If people don't understand that there are different types of venom and different effects to different animals and that not all venom is potentially harmful to people, then it is up to us to educate them, not redefine the terms just to suit the ignorant. Heck, bees, wasps and hornets inject venom when they sting. It's a completely different delivery system with completely different results but it's still venom. We don't change the word or the terms just because of the differences, we maintain the usage of the word venom

Just because we don't like the negative connotations of certain words being used doesn't mean that we should change the terms to ease the minds of the ignorant masses. Look at constrictors for example, the word constrictor is by all means negative, to constrict, to bind, to kill, yet I don't see any of the large constrictor people wanting to change the term from constriction to hugging. "No no no, that snake isn't constricting little Johnny over there, the snake is simply hugging him too tightly.".

In my mind, the only true way we are going to overcome the negative connotations of some of these terms such as venom is with intelligence and trying to educate those that don't understand or know! Changing or not using the correct words doesn't change the facts nor does it help educate people, it only keeps them ignorant and it helps to fan the flames of negativity when something bad does eventually happen.
-----
Troy Rexroth
Rextiles

Again, this is silly, the word venom has lost its meaning due to publications. Harmful or harmless, is now more meaningful.

Hogs, like other harmless snakes, are not "normally" dangerous. You also know that in Australia, most of the elapids are "harmless".

how about them Bee's, they pack a sting, but can kill you. off to see hogs, hope I don't take a bite.

Ok, let's look at this again. With common sensv. To the general public, Venomous means dangerous, even deadly. Fangs to the general public, means hollow pointy delivery systems , like a syringe. Hogs have neither of these. And are not dangerous. If you were bitten by a common sand shark(which have no teeth)on are beaches here in the mid Atlantic, would it not be misleading to tell people the rest of your life that you were bitten by a shark? This is similar to what is being done with Western Hogs. Calling them Rear(Fanged)Venomous is misleading in my opinion. All the science there is won't change my mind in this regard. Using common sense, we see that these are harmless small snakes that can be unfairly seen as dangerous to the general public and the powers to be. Again it is wise to tell anyone who buys a Hog from you that once in a while people do have a non life threatening reaction to a bite.

So in your opinion it is misleading to label a snake something that it actually is? A hognose snake is a colubrid with a rear fang structure. It has been proven that they have venom that is produced by Duvernoy's glands which are in fact venom glands.

Don't you think it is much more misleading to deny or ignore that proven information?

It would be misleading to say they are potentially dangerous. That much I do agree with.

The reason lawmakers have tried to ban hogs is because "Rear Fanged Venomous" sounds dangerous and cause alarm and concern. They failed to ban them because there is no need for concern. At least enough to try to ban them. They were mislead by the catagory they have been put in. Remember not everyone is educated in this subject like the people on this board. When they hear the above it causes panic in people. It doesn't take much to cause panic with non snake lovers, as we all know. Many people hate and are deathly afraid of all snakes. It may be right to call them Rear Fang Venomous, but it sounds bad. I wish there was another catagory to put them in.

What is a Duvernoy's gland? exactly?

There is a circle going on here. Venom must be injected, so if that does not occur, then the Duvernoys Gland does not produce venom.

In Fryes work, he calls the harmful part of colubrid saliva, croto toxin. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm I hope I spelled that right. Oh well.

Anyway, see what I mean, and what Will means. What Frye did was change the rules to fit his agenda. And theres nothing wrong with that. Anyone who does something new, MUST change the rules. Or the old rules would have already worked.

The drawback to Fryes work for us is, how will it effect our already overzealous law makers. Cheers

My hogs have bitten me a few times at feeding time, Mostly the eastens, But the odd western too, My southens are way to small to ever land a bite on me so no idea with them, It has never happened handling them it has always been feeding related sooo to cut a long story short use tongs and don't get the smell of the mice on your hands otherwize you are risking a bite.

I have to say on a scale 1 to 10 pain & swelling maybe a 2 if even that, I had no swelling and i also did not wait around let it munch on me and then get my camera and say cheese lol.. I suggest no one does that, A hognose is not a Rattle snake! chill out, Its venon that many still as we know argue about in my personal experience so please no hate is very weak who knows maybe i should of got the hog to bite me longer and harder lol but it looks like other expert has already showed us the result, My sand boas bite hurts like a millon time more than any of my hognoses and they latch on and don't like letting, But like we saw in those few pics some have a reaction to the bite, So take care.

Be sure to handle your hognoses often depending on the mood of your snake, If you are a noob, Go to a show pick up a CB hognose take care of it and it will probly not bite you its as simple as that, Of my 80 westerns only 3 would i consider a threat to maybe getting a bite on me 1 has been able to so far and it was my fault no tongs soo on the most part i would say pretty peaceful snake..... My Eastens on the other hand out of the 30 i have some LTC most CB i would say 5 could land hits on me and 2 have, So chill out unless you intend to breed them and have 100's of hognoses you new or soon to be hognose owners don't worry they are awesome!

I hate the word Ban i see it so much with reptiles these days its all about education learning from one another and passing it on to others leave out the hate.., Hognoses are amazing, They should research them more that is a FACT..

Some people clearly do not understand how venom works or how allergies work.

If what Troy suffered was indeed a severe enough allergic reaction to cause the swelling it did, he would have gone into anaphylactic shock. An allergic reaction is putting your immune system into overdrive while it attacks an antigen. Envenoming symptoms are NOT the result of your immune system attacking and antigen. Symptoms of a venomous bite are cause by the proteins, amino acids, peptides, and so on, doing what they were designed to do. That is to immobilize/kill prey and break it down. That is the primary use of snake venom. It is not meant to be used as a defense. This is why the majority of venomous snake bites are dry or in such small doses that AV is not required. They are not going to use venom supply on something that are not going to be able to eat.

Facts....
Hognose snakes have FANGS.
Hognose snakes have VENOM GLANDS.
Hognose snakes have VENOM in those glands.
Not being medically significant does not make them nonvenomous.

If you think the % of reactions is very small, you are mistaken. Hog bites are not very common and just a few years back, not many people kept them. Now that they are getting more popular, we are seeing more bites.

Not giving people that information is irresponsible. Lets say a parent buys a cute little hog for their 10 year old. The ten year old gets bitten and has a reaction like troy. Something like that will cause legislation and regulation much faster than the actual facts of what hogs are capable of. The information is out there for "people looking to destroy our hobby". They do not need to look here for it.

You can take that "hogs are not venomous" pill if you like, but do not force others to take it. They say ignorance is bliss. Wanting to be ignorant is just stupid.

Greg,
I've admitted to the fact that I may have made some incorrect statements here. Stating opinion as fact. I also stated that there is nothing wrong with warning people about the risks of owning a hognose. I don't know what else I can say. The fact of the matter is, Troy's post is misleading and harmful. There is no mention of allergic reaction, there is no mention of the venom's weakness, and to the person that knows nothing about snakes, it looks like that kind of reaction is strictly from venom. It could basically be compared to a copperhead bite.
If it were worded differently, I would have no problem with it. The fact is, if those groups get a hold of it, fedex, or anyone else, the way it is worded is damageing to our community. If you dont believe me, sent the post to the fedex help desk, or better yet, lable all your packages as live rear fanged venomous reptile and see where that gets you. Honestly, this has gone way too far.

Well said !!

I am a biological research major, and I am speaking strictley from a scientific definition here but there is a huge difference in the words, venomous, poisonous, and toxic.

Poisons by zoological definition basically have to be ingested. We can all agree they are not poisonous, no argument there.

Venom has to be delivered subcutaneously through structures designed specifically for the task of envenomation. A venomous animal uses "poison" to inject target prey animals or as self defense, because there is no way to get the target to ingest their poison safely or effectively, it is delivered through fangs, stinger etc in the form of venom. Grooved fangs do not count as the delivery system isnt actually through the fangs. Venomous is a very specific word which relates to the way the poison is delivered

A toxin on the other hand is more of a general term. One in which hognose fall into. The word toxin is basically any kind of poisonous substance derived from a living organism that induces antibody formation.

Being that hog do have glands, and the toxins are delivered through the gums via grooved fangs then hognose fit into the broader category of toxic not into the very specific category or venomous.

Sorry guys I just dont like how easily the three terms get interchanged in the herp community.

Will

It is great that you are a biological research major. The only problem is, you are still learning and not applying. Sorry but when it comes to information on snakes and venom, I am going with those who actually study the specifics on snakes and venoms.

The word toxic is a very broad brush stroke and can be applied to anything from snake venom to poison ivy.

Read and pay close attention to the words written by Dr Bryan Grieg Fry (Venomdoc) and Wolfgang Wuster (ww). They are the leading researchers in the field of reptile venom. Sorry Will, but you are way behind these two.

Venomdoc Forums :: View topic - Western hognose snakes

Venomdoc Forums :: View topic - Is western hognose venom life threatning?

Venomdoc Forums :: View topic - ahaetulla & Heterodon nasicus

These are just 3 of a bunch of links that can be easily found.

http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4484

http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2692

http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=673&highlight=heterodon

You can post as many links as you want, but fact is your links support what I tell you.

In layman's terms, poison is consumed, venom HAS to be injected to be considered venom, and toxins cover everything else (its broad because not everything fits into poison or venom). All venom is a toxin but not all toxins are venom. Does that make sense?

My hognose are the same as yours right? Mine dont inject toxins through hollow fangs. Do yours? While they might have glands, the problem with your use of the words is the way that TOXIN gets delivered. And in the case of hognose, its through the gums that the secrete toxins. The grooves in the fangs help enable the TOXIN to enter the victim. Totally different delivery system. Not venomous but toxic. Remember venom is a specific way of delivering a poison to a victim.

Im not trying to fight with anyone or cause problems. Your reply came off as very condescending, directed at me, when in fact I was nice in my post. And I didnt disagree with anything you said. I only disagreed with some terminology that some of you misuse.

You jumped on the guy below for "spreading" misinformation. We in fact you are doing the same thing with your misunderstanding of the words venom, poison, and toxin.

Will

This is fun

Another point. Do you notice with all hognose bites, how long it takes for the TOXIN to spread? It takes a good while. There is scientific reasons for this. The delivery system! Venom affects the body much quicker because it is delivered through a superior method. When taking a hot bite the venom is actually getting injected subcutaneously delivering it in a much more effective manner.

With animals such as hognose that have TOXINS not venom, the toxin secreted from the glands has to work its way into the wound. This is a much slower system of delivery and usually much less effective. Effective enough for what hognose need but not effective enough to be concerned about. Now if you look at a boomslang (which I think you brought up in another post comparing the hog to the boomslang) which is truely a rear fanged venomous, the delivery system is the same as with all front fanged vipers. Through hollow fangs...Why do you think a boomslang bite is considered so serious? Not only because of the level of toxicity, but because of the delivery system.

Get it? Hognose not venomous...boomslang VERY much so (remember its all about the delivery system not the location of the fangs).

Will

I never claimed to be doing any kind of work with snake venom. I am however quite aware of the different delivery systems, and you are in fact very much regurgitating facts that someone else TOLD you. Doesnt this go along with Franks theory on recipe husbandry? You have no scientific merit to your statements.

Im not refuting the fact that in the hobby we consider hognose rear fanged venomous. That is only because we dont have a classification called rear fanged toxic, potentially harmful. They are not venomous by definition, and I am tired of people trying to spread this misinformation. Does it take away from the potential threat they can cause? No, did I at all imply it did? No. I simply stated most of you guys use the wrong words, or you use the words interchangeably and its just not proper. Did I say you were incorrect about your statements? No I did not, that is for another topic. I simply stated they are not by zoological definition venomous rear fanged, or otherwise.

Your reply came off very condescending. My reply wasnt directed at you, or anyone in particular for that matter, it was aimed at everyone. I was even nice about it. I didnt even comment on what you continue to spread as fact when most of what you are saying, you read on a forum somewhere. Simple as it is, you are defending incorrect information if you keep on with the mindset they are venomous. What field of study is your scientific knowledge in? I say knowledge because it is quite obvious you are in no way shape or form, formally educated in the matter.

Good day friend
Will Wohlers

Thanks for sharing your knowledge, Makes sense they have a Toxin not full blown Venom, The battle continues... Herpers/Breeders vs Science, Its like the battle the Church (Earth was made in a matter of days..) vs Men of science ( A matter of days? you are kidding me right? lol. Why i say more Research!!! LOOK EVERYONE CLAIMS SOMETHING DIFFERENT so lets find out...google it first thing that comes up read and the well whos right ???? will appear in your brain ???? so many claims loads of examples go against what was said in the last posts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hognose so MORE RESEARCH, Knowledge is awesome and there is no better place to get it than guys who breed snakes over years and invest alot of money in there hobby and passion.
After years in the army i am trying to turn my childhood hobby and passion into reality having already kept and bred hognoses,sand boas,dragons,geckos(to many to list) in Europe as a KID going to every HAMM Reptile Show possible learning alot from so many different Herpers around the world, Now i live in the states to follow my herpetologist dreams. Reptile politics always gets in the way of the truth.. Or at least it feels and sounds that way, I feel a very hostile vibe to outsiders, Don't scare away guys that want to share and learn, Thats my 2 cents worth

Thanks. Yes I would have to agree with you. People dont like being pointed at and told they are wrong. It just ruffles even the most ignorant persons feathers on these public forums (not talking about anyone here, let me make that clear so people dont attack me). This is the same reason people try and bully Frank.

It does seem that wikipedia has a little more knowledge on these animals and their toxin delivery system then some of the people here (that was directed at people here) realize. Truth is, keep calling them venomous and youre eventually just gonna have to get your feathers ruffled. Fact.

Will

As you can see, that bullying doesn't work. And for good reason. I spend lots of time in the field. That's real, this no so much.

Nothing can harm you here, you can only benefit if something good pops up.

The rest is people playing people games, which is behaviorally normal and at times fun. Best wishes

I have to agree with Will, and I too worked in a venom lab. hahahahahahahaha well rounded fella I am.

ALso, I had this conversation with Greg Fry, at a party, lots of Drinks and such. With him, its like here. Two different things. At some point, science(Frys work) seperates from reality. That is day to day usage.

In day to day encounters, HOGNOSE are harmless. That is, normal day to day activities such as picking them up(in nature) no specific care is taken by all the folks I see harassing them in nature, they just pick them up and not bother where the head is. Again, much like many Ozzie elapids. And they have real fangs and real venom.

The reality is, there is no comparison between Hognose and Mohave rattlesnakes, One, the hognose, well its harmless, the other, the Mohave is dangerous and will knock your dingler in the dirt. I saw three mohaves and one hog this mourning. I freely picked up the hog and avoided the mohaves. That is the difference.

Has anyone died from a hog bite? has there been loss of limbs or digits? etc. Thanks

Frank, I do not believe anyone tried to compare hogs to crotalids. There is a huge difference in venom potency and delivery. However, the fact that hogs are rear fanged and have a less effective delivery system couple with a mild venom, this does not make them nonvenomous. I do not consider hogs to even remotely dangerous. I have kept and bred some of the most dangerous vipers in the world so for me, hogs are completely harmless.

Calling them "toxic" does not change the fact that they have venom inside venom glands with rear fangs to administer the venom. I do not understand the logic.

There are no recorded loss of life or limb due to a hognose bite. That still does not take away the fact that they are indeed a rear fanged venomous colubrid.

As I type this, I am scratching my ankle where a spider bit me. All spiders are venomous but there are very few that are medically significant.

I understand Gregg, and as I said, I do not disagree. But Will has a point, and its unrelated to your approach.

Will's concern and my concern in my disuccsion With Dr. Frye was, aside what your terminology.

Its some yahoo lawyer and/or, some yahoo politician Trying to make a name for himself by passing laws or ordinances. They could careless if the animals in concern are toxic, or venomous, or dangerous or harmless. They are only looking for a tool to further their career.

About Frye, Hes doing an amazing job. But you have to understand what he is doing. Hes making a name for himself in the field of venoms. They want to do such things as find new chemicals or proteins to help cure disease etc. The field is or was somewhat limited. So whats a boy to do. Change the field of play. Make it bigger. The truth is, colubids including hogs were harmless last decade and have not changed. Just the terminology changed. The animals are the same.

In his case, you have a lot more to play with, if there is more venomous species, ones never studied. Also in his case, its not about their animals, Hes from OZ. and these snakes are not. So its not his concern what our yahoo law makers do. IT has nothing to do with him or his work.

In Oz. there is a different mentality, They go by the end result. If a species of elapid does not have deleterious effects when it bites you, its considered harmless.

Heck they toss around really venomous dangerous snakes like they are play toys. The reason is simple, those snakes are peawater poor at biting. If rattlesnakes had Elapid venom, there would be no one in Az or texas. Jokes please.

Its not Fryes concern what happens here and lawmakers are not concerned with your terminology, as long as it serves their purpose. Best wishes

All I can say is that boomslangs were considered harmless until Karl Schmidt was killed by one. Not saying that is at all the case with hogs. Just an example how things change.

The problem may be this. Snakes and the evolution of snakes.

There are snakes that are harmless, mildly deleterious, and snakes that can be fatal.

In order to teach, science pigeonholes information. that is, sections it off and separates it in order to understand it. In reality, there is no such separation.

Ther'e levels that are clear, teeth, enlarged teeth, grooved teeth and hollow fangs. There are levels of toxicity. From apparently harmless saliva to pure harmful venom. When they teach you this, they must make them separate them so you can learn. The problem is they rarely come back and tell you, that there actually is no real separation, once you understand the basics.

Harmless saliva can and does contain, elements of dangerous saliva, harmless and dangerous salvia also contains elements/chemicals that are present in dangerous venom.

All saliva presents problems when and how it enters the bloodstream.

You recently moved your lines of separation with hogs, as you became educated. Which is great, but, in my mind, your original lines were in error. No snake saliva is harmless. All can be deleterious in the right amounts under the right conditions.

end part 1

Whoops I lost it, dang, got to go work now

"It is great that you are a biological research major. The only problem is, you are still learning and not applying. Sorry but when it comes to information on snakes and venom, I am going with those who actually study the specifics on snakes and venoms."

Only thing is we are all still learning. When I say major, thats what I majored in in college. I actually have my masters degree in biological research, and am currently attending Michigan State for another masters in herpetology so get to know someone before you make snap judgements and assumptions. It only makes you look even more uninformed.

You are going with those who actually study the specifics on snakes and venoms? But you are completely misreading what VenomDoc says, so therefore you are spouting out recipes to horrible tasting dishes. If you really want to comment on something make sure you properly read the material, and then to go one further make sure you know what the material is saying before you go misquoting nonsense. With all that said you are actually going against those who study the specifics on snakes and venom.

Remember any redneck can breed a snake. It takes a intelligent person to understand them.

Will

Here is condescending for you.
I can care less about your studies. You are a student. That means nothing right now. Its like saying you are studying to be a general practitioner doctor. Thats awesome but I am not going to go to you for heart surgery.

Now, bellow, in red, are direct quotes from Dr. BGF. I do not see where he says hogs are "toxic" and not venomous. Please point it out if I have missed it. Maybe I am the dumb one but I doubt it. Notice how Dr. BGF calls it a venom and not a toxin. Is the worlds leading venom researcher misusing terms?

The toad popping mythology is completely wrong. They do have venom, they do use it but they are not medically important to humans.

The most severe recorded bites have been limited primarily to localised swelling and blistering and these were under extreme circumstances (deliberate allowing of prolonged chewing). Effects that are utterly inconsistent with allergy.

Yes I am using the term 'medically important' in the context of capacity to cause notable or severe human envenomations. This is to stress that just because something has venomous, does not mean it is dangerous.

Heterodon are small, inoffensive snakes that are very appropriate as pets. While they are technically venomous, like most other colubrids,

The Heterodon venom is typical Xenodontinae in that it is rich in medium/large proteins and has less of three finger toxins than the Colubrinae. The

A bit on boomslangs fangs, Mr. I know all about delivery systems... Boomslangs do not have hollow fangs. Not one single member of the colubridae family have hollow fangs for injecting venom. They have grooved fangs. Again, this is very easy information to find. It is better for someone to keep quiet and let people think they are an idiot than it is for that someone to open their mouth and remove all doubt.

Wow could not care less? That says it all.. Are you french by any chance?

I do not even know why I am replying to you but here it goes.

Yes, I can care less about his schooling. Reason being, it does not have any weight in this conversation. He is not a venom researcher, he does not know about delivery systems as he claims. At least not on a species to species level.

And no, I am not French. Why that makes a difference is beyond me. Was that your attempt at being funny?

Now, maybe you can try bring something substantial to this conversation other than unfunny jokes. You know, like facts, literature, quotes from toxicologists, and so on. If not you may just want to sit back and read. You may learn something.

I once had respect for you as a breeder, great looking morphs alot to say and share, As a person you act like a frenchmen that was a joke and making a point at the same time, Arogant beyond belief not giving a crap what others have to say that have been studying for years that person must have passion to learn like that and you just diss him and put him down, Another french trait, but anyways what i am trying to get at is for a person that knows alot, At the same time you put all your faith in one Doc and say the rest and everyone else who knows what they are talking about are wrong, Facts? lol! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hognose but nooo gregg you are the hognose guru god they are also wrong and so on because the more quotes i am reading the more i relize you are either crazy or right!, I have met many guys like you in the army total bullys.. Such a shame that a guy that breeds awesome hogs has to be like this to others. I read and learn everyday and i am thankful to be able to enjoy my hobby and passion to even still be alive after my service, Too have as many hognoses and sand boas as i do, And i got alot from hanging with John Berry at shows in England growing up as a kid But you will probly say he knows nothing either, I respect that man a millon times more than you and he cares what others have to say even if he does not agree with them.

See Lance, you are not getting it. I am not putting all my faith in one doc. However, when the venom has been directly studied by him to the point where it is broken down by amino acids, proteins, and toxins are identified in a lab with actual literature being drawn up, how can that info be curbed by a biology student who is not working with or studying venom? Does that make sense?

I think it is great that Will is going for all of these classes and what not. But that still means nothing in this conversation. That was thrown out there by Will so he can use it as a vantage point. However, it is not enough to ignore factual information.

As far as me being a guru or whatever, that is just silly. I do however have a huge understanding lots of knowledge when it comes to venom, venomous snakes, and their delivery system over 20 years of keeping vipers will force you to learn.

My knowledge of hognose venom and delivery only came to me because I was once ignorant to the facts until they were pointed out to me.

As far a John Berry goes, I respect the man a lot. I have been in contact with him and we message eachother. He was kind enough to put my photos in his hog book and did me a huge favor my mentioning my SIM containers in his book numerous times. I can see exactly why you respect him. Although I am not sure what this has to do with anything.

I didnt say anything to fight. I dont care one way or another if you keep thinking the way you do. I simply put my knowledge into the discussion and I get jumped on. Is it because my knowledge threatens you? I never once attempted to belittle you or your knowledge. I wasnt even talking to you to begin with but the masses. You keep throwing "classes" out there like you know what I do for a living. I actually got my bachelors in biology, masters in biological research and have dedicated the rest of my years to doing field study. I work for a University and am only continuing to follow my passion in getting another masters this time in herpetology. It really makes no difference career wise for me to have another masters. I am simply doing it because reptiles are my passion. Why did you start all this bull[bleep] with me, when I didnt even disagree with you? Heaven forbid if I would have but thats not the point...

You are right the majority of my knowledge is not in venom delivery systems on a species level. I do have vast knowledge on this subject for certain species that I work with and do field studies on, but I do not claim to know even close to all the animals on a species level. That is one reason I am chasing my passion with a degree in herpetology.

I didnt use my credentials to give me any leg up in the issue. I simply stated my credentials because of people like you. If someone doesnt have some kind of paper backing them up you think their statements have no merit. I wanted to contribute and be taken seriously so I stated my knowledge base to continue on with the conversation.

Point is, you are still to unintelligent to get the point. In order to be venomous, the said venomous animal, has to have fangs in which to INJECT the frickin venom. It is the only method that could qualify them as venomous. Hognose do not inject venom! Therefore by zoological definition they are not VENOMOUS!

They may have glands. But until the proteins and enzymes in

Rest of the message got cut off.

They may have glands. But until the proteins and enzymes in so called "venom" get injected via hollow fangs or a stinger it actually isnt venom! Do you understand? Because of the delivery system they completely get classified as toxic. You do know that in the zoological field there is no such thing as rear fanged venomous right? We as herpers added the venomous part. Scientifically speaking the rear fanged colubrid family isnt broken up into venomous and non venomous. Can you tell me any rear fanged "non venomous" snakes in the hobby? It is an oxymoron.

I bet you didnt know that actually, since you regularly throw the term rear fanged venomous around. Have you ever heard your doc refer to them as that? lol

Now Im done wasting my time on ignorance. If you have something relevant or nice to say then we can continue on with the DISCUSSION. This isnt a slamfest right? We all are here for the same reasons right? Or am I mistaken?

Will Wohlers

Hi Will, what are you working on in the field??? hahahahahahahaha while snakes in captivity are great, and do allow real information(naturalistic observation) In the field is my passion.

The way i see it is there is sooo much infomation about this subject that i am at a confused point sorting out the fact from the fiction, I read alot and spent my whole childhood breeding various reptiles nothing compared to your experience having kept Venomous snakes for 20 years, To be totaly honest i'm 50/50 whether its an venom or toxin,I'm swaying towards venom but then i keep finding other infomation that says or suggests different, I will take your word and years of experience and class it in my mind as a Venom, If it was not for John Berry i would not have ever got into hognoses or moved to the states great guy, Since i left the military a few years ago i have devoted and put everything i got into becoming a aspiring herpetologist to have success one day like John Berry and Yourself and many other great breeders, I only recently found this forum it was pointed out to me at columbus reptile show where i sell most of my hognose or sand boa offspring, I may of jumped the gun abit in some of the things i said so i am sorry if i offended you, Why did you not write like this in your other posts? I refered to John Berry because he is a man i know and respect in the hognose world and have met alot growing up and i was disappointed someone that he has in his book was acting negative towards others that why, I have never met you so i was building a picture in my mind the kind of person you are from the way you were writing, Human nature..

"I think it is great that Will is going for all of these classes and what not. But that still means nothing in this conversation. That was thrown out there by Will so he can use it as a vantage point."

When going on about your years of experience with venomous snakes you seem to be doing the same thing.

Most of this debate seems to be about semantics.

There are dictionary definitions, legal definitions, colloquial definitions and scientific definitions all which have their place.
I think all the years of schooling and experience are pretty irrelevant. Anybody with half a brain can research and understand the various definitions and opinions of what constitutes 'venomous' in an hour or so.

I really am sorry if I sound like a condescending jerk or what ever. I just find it frustrating that with all the factual information being present by me and Troy that people still want to act like an ostrich and burry their head in the sand. You can not side step facts. When you do, you look like a little ignorant kid who wants to hide away from the boggie man. In this case, the boggie man is real and it is hognose venom.

It is equally frustrating to see the word play like "they are not venomous, they are toxic". Seriously? And you also said that boomslangs have a different delivery system than hogs do and that boomslangs have hollow fangs. You presented this as factual information. The fact is they have the exact same delivery system and boomslangs DO NOT have hollow fang. No colubrid does.

Someone with your educational background should be more responsible when it comes to giving out information, especially when you go around tooting your own horn about your schooling.

I wasnt tooting my own horn. Only trying to establish my educational merit in the topic as to be taken seriously in the conversation. You my friend start slinging word or something like I was talking about your mama, or your hogs for that matter. I wasnt attacking anyone, and it is obvious from my post as such. I was only adding to the discussion. Like I said I am not up to date on every single species. I know no colubrid has hollow fangs. The debate is all in the delivery system. I am not arguing the structure I am not arguing anything with you other than the fact that they are not venomous by definition. You and me might call them venomous from arguments sake in the hobby, but zoologically speaking they simply are not. I dont know how you took offense to my post when it wasnt anything at all referring to you. Especially to the point to talk to me like you did. For all you know we could be good friends, you might want some hogs from me one day, or I of yours, or hell you might slow down and see that I actually have something to contribute here. Like I said above, we are here for the same reason arnt we? Or are you just hear to try and squash out people that dont agree with your way of thinking?

Will Wohlers

Please, do not make it personal. We have had enough of that.

Stick to your guns and dig up something useful.

Read my reply to Gregg.

Its not about terminology or any of that. Its about what some yahoo lawyer or Politian will do with this new terminology. In fact, they do not care about the facts or correct understanding. Or if they are dangerous or not. They just want to do something.

best wishes

I wasnt intending for that last message to come off as any kind of personal insult. I was trying to point out the fact that Gregg is talking to me and taking offense to my statements as if I said something about something/or someone he loves. Sorry if it came off as a personal attack in any way. I am however sticking to my guns as I keep only presenting facts and gregg cant seem to swallow them because Im not a doctor that was working on a study 8 years or so ago.
Will

I think both of you have good points, The problem is TOO much information muddys the water. The terms Gregg is using, are not exact. You can apply them in various ways.

In this case, simplicity is important. Hognose use to be harmless and all was fine, no one died and such. And they have not changed.

What has changed is academics. That is, the advancement of information that is aside from, the day to day activities of these animals. This is something you sir have to be careful of as you gain your education.

Hognose were kept normally before without problem. Again, its like renaming species, great, fine, good on you, but it does not effect or change that species in nature, it does not change as its names change. They are what they use to be, no matter what we call them. In all reality, THEY ARE. we on the otherhand, like to fiddle fart and muck around.

The simple fact is, you can get a fat hand from a parakeet.

Where I agree with you is, folks aside from the actual keeping on these animals can and will use Some terms to advance their careers. That is, pass legislation. In their field, that is how they make a career. It doesn't matter if what they pass is useful, needed, or meaningful. On paper, its all the same. It doesn't matter if we call it, toxic or venom or swallow it and call it poison. They just want to pass legislation. And we suffer, more then an occasional fat hand.

Take the laws on Burmese pythons. They are still bred in captivity, still sold in petshops, Still taken across state borders. All it did was mess with a few individual people. Drove them underground.

Which by the way is unconstitutional. We are not suppose to make laws to criminalize individuals. That may be a poor example, but it IS an example. Best wishes

That was very well said Frank. You even bring up points that I havent considered myself in the past. Fact of the matter is, we, as a group, and as a hobby are changing. Not the animals. It doesnt matter if you consider them venomous, toxic, or completely void of any potential dangers, the animals are the same animals we have been keeping and studying for years.

We only believe we are getting smarter. Only thing is with our higher "knowledge" comes legislation. And I dont care what side of the fence you are on in the whole venom, toxin debate, I think we are all on the same side of the fence when it comes to legislation, and where we as a group of intelligent hobbyists, want that to go.

Will

Its not that I totally disagree with you Gregg, its just that we do not KNOW, what is the problem. Troy tries to be so accurate in other areas, but in this one, its lack of knowledge. It was not determined what caused the swelling. Everything after that is speculation.

So we say, allergic or venom. Who knows. Simply put, that type of reaction occurs with the entrance of foreign protein. And no one said it was a SEVERE reaction. A minor reaction, allergic or otherwise.

And yes, hogs have enlarged rear teeth, althought the general understanding is, fangs in snakes, are hollow or grooved. Large teeth, are just that large teeth. Tree boas and such, have friggin huge teeth, and they are not considered fangs. And they do can cause swelling such as Troy had.

Saliva as a purpose, all saliva, In many cases, people are sensitive to it.

As mentioned earlier, harmless or dangerous, that should be the label. Hogs are harmless, just like Treeboas, or any other harmless snake, and all can cause that type of problem.

With truly dangerous/venomous snakes, a bite is serious, if venom was injected, its going to cause problems. In Troys case, he only had this one reaction from several bites?????

Once I got a cactus spine in the thumb, and I lost my nail, and almost my finger, worse them two of my hot snake bites(blacktail and banded rock) Consider, I get stuck with cactus on a daily basis, but that only happened once. GOT ME

Once a rainbow boa, bit my friend on the wrist and it almost killed him. ER he went.

But you are right, the new herp keepers needs to understand there is the possibility of danger with all wild animals. hanta virus anyone. Cheers

I'm not sure why but people seem to be confusing the two issues:

One, whether something should be drawn attention to online in a manner which could result in a skewed perception.
Two, explaining the realistic risks of handling a reptile to a potential customer in a one-on-one conversation.

Well I am not sure why this needs to be all hush hush. Hogs while being venomous, they are not dangerous.

Troys post was not misleading or harmful in any way. It was not an allergic reaction so there is no point in mentioning that. That reaction is strictly from the venom. So why call it something else? Troy was bitten, the snake did what they do in order to work its VENOM into the holes it made in Troys finger with its FANGS. The venom entered the blood stream and worked its way up Troys arm. The same as any other venomous snake bite.

Again, that reaction that Troy posted is atypical to allergic reaction and typical to being envenomed.

Can it be compared with a copperhead bite. No. Copper heads are front fanged pit vipers that have cause numerous fatalities and their bites cause extensive tissue damage.

CourtGaverth, not to sound like a jerk, but the more you post the more it becomes clear that you do not have extensive knowledge of allergies or venomous snake bites. That is not really a bad thing in general. Not many people do. However, when you are trying to "prove a point" you should really have knowledge on the subject.

I have kept venomous snakes (crotalids and true African viperids) for many years. I did not believe hogs were venomous. That is until I was pointed to the proper information.

Greg,
You are right. I don't have extensive knowlege on envenomations. I am only stating that it may look bad to people with 0 knowlege. It just looks like this is what might happen to just about anyone bitten by a hog. It could be manipulated to be taken that way anyway. My intention is not to make anyone look bad. Please don't take it that way.
Troy,
I just read your post. I agree. We can all learn from this. I have learned a great deal from this post. I am sorry if anyone took this as an attack. It was not my intention. As a former venomous keeper, I disliked captive envenomation posts as well. I hope no body here has gotten a sour taste from my reaction.

Court,

It seems people aren't really paying attention to what you're saying, and would rather keep highlighting their superiority of knowledge.
You made it abundantly clear that you weren't necessarily disputing their scientific claims - though I personally think they could easily be wrong and you shouldn't be intimidated by all these claims of 'years of experience'. I've kept numerous animals including monkeys, foxes, mink, wildcats (hence the name caracal) and 100's of others. I've been bitten too many times to mention. I've also had reactions to bites, visually identical to Troy's, from animals that are absolutely not venomous in the regular sense of the word.
That having been said, most of us accept that hogs are rear-fanged venomous.
Certainly all this talk of "responsibility" is just self righteous posturing. Like you said, explaining to a customer the risks of hognose handling (which are probably close to zero), has nothing to with drawing attention on a public forums to an unusual overreaction to a bite.
Bottom line - it's not about 'facts' - it's about politics.
It's not about being "hush hush" - it's about discretion.

It seems people aren't really paying attention to what you're saying, and would rather keep highlighting their superiority of knowledge.

Superiority of knowledge? Its about having the right information presented.

You made it abundantly clear that you weren't necessarily disputing their scientific claims - though I personally think they could easily be wrong and you shouldn't be intimidated by all these claims of 'years of experience'.

Are the people who actually studied the venom of hognose snakes wrong? You know, the ones with the PHd who do this for a living? The info Troy and myself are presenting is fact based on the reports and studies.

I've kept numerous animals including monkeys, foxes, mink, wildcats (hence the name caracal) and 100's of others. I've been bitten too many times to mention. I've also had reactions to bites, visually identical to Troy's, from animals that are absolutely not venomous in the regular sense of the word.

What are these animals that are not venomous in the regular sense of the word?

That having been said, most of us accept that hogs are rear-fanged venomous.

And those who do not accept that fact are foolish. So why all the resistance?

Certainly all this talk of "responsibility" is just self righteous posturing. Like you said, explaining to a customer the risks of hognose handling (which are probably close to zero), has nothing to with drawing attention on a public forums to an unusual overreaction to a bite.

Since when is providing proper information self righteous posturing? And obviously having a reaction to their venom is not close to zero. It is becoming more common as the species becomes more popular in collections. Troys reaction is not all that unusual.

Hi, you may be showing something important here. Those of us who were lucky enough to work with lots of animals, zoos or otherwise, have seen that type of reaction, from many harmless animals. Others here may not have. That does make a difference in how you would think about it. Best wishes

I Just read your post to Troy about you being a former venomous keeper. Not sure how long you kept venomous for, but even if it was not very long you should know the difference between an envenoming and an allergic reaction. My opinion is that you know the difference full well. You are just trying to down play the facts, which I totally get. However, getting a puffy hand for a couple of days is not going to cause law makers to make a move against the hognose keeping community. They are still considered a harmless snake in all States and Countries. Even with scientific literature, law makers have been unsuccessful in getting hognose snakes banned or regulated because of their mild, medically insignificant venom.

I myself, have tens of thousands of dollars invested in hognose snakes. I produced some amazing hogs this season. I don't want to see regulations put on them. I am not worried about it happening and Troys post will not be the nail in the hognose coffin.

I think you're probably right , though I personally would err on the side of caution