Editing Snakebite (section)

=== Antivenom ===
Until the advent of [[antivenom]], bites from some species of snake were almost universally fatal.<ref name="INCHEM">{{cite web | vauthors = White J  |title=Oxyuranus microlepidotus |url=http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/animal/taipan.htm |date=November 1991 |publisher=Chemical Safety Information from Intergovernmental Organizations |quote=Without appropriate antivenom treatment up to 75% of taipan bites will be fatal. Indeed, in the era before specific antivenom therapy, virtually no survivors of taipan bite were recorded. |access-date=24 July 2009 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090803070213/http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/animal/taipan.htm |archive-date=3 August 2009}}</ref> Despite huge advances in emergency therapy, antivenom is often still the only effective treatment for envenomation. The first antivenom was developed in 1895 by French physician [[Albert Calmette]] for the treatment of [[Indian cobra]] bites. Antivenom is made by injecting a small amount of venom into an animal (usually a horse or sheep) to initiate an immune system response. The resulting [[antibodies]] are then harvested from the animal's blood.{{citation needed|date=March 2023}}

Antivenom is injected into the person [[Intravenous therapy|intravenously]], and works by binding to and neutralizing venom enzymes. It cannot undo the damage already caused by venom, so antivenom treatment should be sought as soon as possible. Modern antivenoms are usually polyvalent, making them effective against the venom of numerous snake species. Pharmaceutical companies that produce antivenom target their products against the species native to a particular area. The availability of antivenom is a major concern in some areas, including most of Africa, due to economic reasons (antivenom crisis).<ref name=":0" /> In Sub-Saharan Africa, the efficacy of antivenom is often poorly characterised and some of the few available products have even been found to lack effectiveness.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Potet |first1=Julien |last2=Smith |first2=James |last3=McIver |first3=Lachlan |date=2019-06-24 |title=Reviewing evidence of the clinical effectiveness of commercially available antivenoms in sub-Saharan Africa identifies the need for a multi-centre, multi-antivenom clinical trial |journal=PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases |language=en |volume=13 |issue=6 |pages=e0007551 |doi=10.1371/journal.pntd.0007551 |issn=1935-2735 |pmc=6615628 |pmid=31233536 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

Although some people may develop serious adverse reactions to antivenom, such as [[anaphylaxis]], in emergency situations this is usually treatable in a hospital setting and hence the benefit outweighs the potential consequences of not using antivenom. Giving [[adrenaline]] (epinephrine) to prevent adverse reactions to antivenom before they occur might be reasonable in cases where they occur commonly.<ref name="Nuch2000" /> Antihistamines do not appear to provide any benefit in preventing adverse reactions.<ref name="Nuch2000">{{cite journal | vauthors = Nuchpraryoon I, Garner P | title = Interventions for preventing reactions to snake antivenom | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | issue = 2 | pages = CD002153 | year = 2000 | volume = 1999 | pmid = 10796682 | pmc = 7017854 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD002153}}</ref>