Slashdot Mirror


The Life-Saving Gifts of the World's Most Venomous Animal (newyorker.com)

tedlistens writes: It was a terrible sting off the coast of Hawaii that inspired Angel Yanagihara, a biology researcher, to spend her life studying the bizarre culprit. Comprising some 50 species, box jellyfish are not like other jellyfish: they have 24 eyes, can move with intention and at surprising speed, and have something resembling a brain. They are also considered to be among the most venomous animals on Earth, killing more people every year than sharks do. Once inside the body, its venom acts "like buckshot" on blood cells. One species, the four-pound, nine-foot-long sea wasp, is said to have enough venom at any one time to kill ninety to one hundred and twenty humans.

As ocean currents and biomes change, various species of dangerous box jellyfish have shown up in places where they have not recently been abundant, including Japan, India, Israel, Florida, and the Jersey Shore. But compared to other venoms, research on jellyfish has remained in the dark ages. New methods for collecting venom—including one that relies on beer—along with a better understanding of box-jelly biochemistry may point to better non-antibiotic protections from them, and to novel defenses for humans against other fatal infections from anthrax and the antibiotic-resistant "superbug" MRSA, says Yanagihara. (Venoms are already the basis of a handful of FDA-approved drugs that have generated billions for the pharma industry.) Now the U.S. military is helping to fund Yanagihara's research, and applying a cream she developed to thwart box jellyfish, which have already left serious stings on a dozen Army divers at a training facility in Florida, and forced one diver out of the program.

49 comments

  1. Wait a minute by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    As ocean currents and biomes change, various species of dangerous box jellyfish have shown up in places where they have not recently been abundant, including Japan, India, Israel, Florida, and the Jersey Shore.

    Is it too much to hope that one of these little guys could, maybe, take care of Snooki for us? I'm just sayin'.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Wait a minute by jd · · Score: 2

      Typically, venomous creatures are immune to a wide range of toxins.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Wait a minute by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      Maybe they were talking about the original Jersey in Europe, not New Jersey.

      Unless of course the idiot who wrote the article assumes everyone is familiar with a trash MTV reality show.

    3. Re:Wait a minute by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      "Jersey Shore" is a term for the New Jersey coastline. The show was named after an already well-known area; maybe the writer was more familiar with the area than the crappy show.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    4. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but for research purposes it would be a bit more ethical to experiment that way.
      After all, this jellyfish at least has something resembling a brain. Best not to risk it.

    5. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As ocean currents and biomes change, various species of dangerous box jellyfish have shown up in places where they have not recently been abundant, including Japan, India, Israel, Florida, and the Jersey Shore.

      I fail to see this situation as a problem. Could be say it is a societal benefit on a global basis? Sure it would be better if China was among the listed places where the box jellyfish has taken up residence off their shores.

  2. Sharks don't kill very many people by tompaulco · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For all the hoopla, sharks don't kill very many people. The fact that Box Jellyfish kill more people than sharks do is unimpressive. In the U.S., the country with the most shark attacks, one person is killed about every other year.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    1. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think the statistics paint quite a different picture when you include sharks with lasers.

    2. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by The+Real+Dr+John · · Score: 3, Informative

      Great, but why the hoopla over billions of profits for the pharmaceutical industry? The gouging of consumers with higher and higher drug prices is not a plus. I am not enthralled with the prospect of more huge profits for the drug companies. That money comes from people, many of whom really can't afford to jack up the profits for the wealthy people running big pharma.

      --
      A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
    3. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      With numbers that large, we need to start a War On Sharks.

    4. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by xevioso · · Score: 1

      The article says upwards of 40 are killed in the Phillippines every year.

      More importantly, these sorts of jellyfish are expected to become more common.

    5. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      Then I really would start to worry, every problem we declare war on gets worse.

    6. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by youngone · · Score: 3, Informative
      I know you're being funny, but there really is a war on sharks, and the Chinese are winning.

      Every year they kill something like 100 million sharks, although as there is an awful lot of illegal fishing, the figure could be twice that. If that rate of slaughter continues, one of the oldest types of animals in the Earth's oceans will become extinct in our lifetimes.

      According to Wikipedia, sharks have been around for something like 420 million years, which makes them hugely successful. One of the few creatures older are the Jellyfish, so I wonder what will happen to the Jellyfish populations when the sharks are gone?

      Sorry, one of my pet hates, and I'm ranting a bit now.

    7. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Informative

      According TFA, ACE inhibitors, a very useful, very common and now very inexpensive medication came from the venom of the Brazilian somethingorother viper. Yes, it went through the period of time when it wasn't generic but once the general active structure was worked out, there was a time when there was the ACE inhibitor of the week club. The dozen or so competing drugs kept the prices sort of reasonable.

      So yeah, Big Pharma gets it's cut, but for small molecules (as opposed to biologics which are antibodies which are much harder to manufacture*), once the structure gets out, it's pretty much all over for the original company. The point being that venoms are biologically interesting molecules. Nature has manufactured structures that do neat things to other cells (blow them up, gum up the power plant and a host of other mechanisms). Once we know the structure, we can tweak it. Protein chemistry has come to a point where determining the structure of a complex molecule is basically a PhD thesis. Then you can work on smaller molecules (easier to make) that can modulate the original enzyme. So a whole new class of venoms is a big deal.

      * biologicals are now being manufactured by the generics (isn't progress wonderful). Big Pharma is fighting back by trying to get those manufacturers to go through the clinical trials showing safety and utility - a huge time and expense. The problem (from a libertarian point of view) is that Big Pharma has a couple of good points. Biologics aren't the 'same' molecule - they're close. But until we have a lot more experience with them, it is not unreasonable to do the clinical trials. The generic manufacturers, of course, have a different view.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    8. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      One of the few creatures older are the Jellyfish, so I wonder what will happen to the Jellyfish populations when the sharks are gone?

      Jelly fish taste reasonably good, so no big deal. :)

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by wheelbarrio · · Score: 2

      Although the U.S. has more historically documented shark attacks in total, Australia is some way out in front when it comes to fatal shark attack: http://www.sharkattackdata.com... Over the last few years there have been around 3 fatal attacks per year in Australian coastal waters. Not a great many, but more than "every other year". When it comes to numbers per head of population, it's not even close! We like to swim and surf, and share our waters with relatively large numbers of potentially dangerous sharks (as well as box jellyfish, and crocodiles...)

    10. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a great way to save the great white from it's current vulnerable state.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    11. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW, a libertarian would expect the consumer to spend a half second looking for a seal of approval from a trusted independent research facility on their medication, the same way you can look for the seal of approval from a trusted independent research facility on your electronics right now. They would not expect the government to run such a program unless it was a cost effective adjunct to what the free market should be free to provide. Yes, just like with electronics, chances are the market would have so few unapproved items in it that people would not put in much effort looking for approval. How is that bad, again?

      But in the same way as you suggest, generics would be expected to seek approval if they'd like to actually sell their medication to anyone other than those too dull minded to bother looking out for their own health and safety.

    12. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by DriveDog · · Score: 1

      Over what time period? It's been trending upward lately and is higher than that, but yes, I still agree with the spirit of your statement. However, we should also be comparing the number of serious shark bites to the number of jellyfish stings with long-term consequences. There are quite a few swimmers who tangled with sharks and are now missing an arm, a foot, part of a hip, etc. So... what about the number of people who are stung and don't die but are plagued with issues for years following the sting? Does this even occur very often?

    13. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I know you're being funny, but there really is a war on sharks, and the Chinese are winning.
      Every year they kill something like 100 million sharks, although as there is an awful lot of illegal fishing, the figure could be twice that. If that rate of slaughter continues, one of the oldest types of animals in the Earth's oceans will become extinct in our lifetimes.

      I don't think there's much "legal" shark hunting going on - finning is basically an undercover operation these days. Albeit, it's done out in the open, with the authorities doing a wink wink nod nod to the fact it happens. (It provides a valuable export to those countries, and you can bet organized crime is heavily involved).

      Gordon Ramsay and crew were expelled from Costa Rica while filming illegal finning operations.

    14. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you know that sharks are an foreign, uncontrolled, dangerous wild creature and they exist right on our borders!!

      We need a wall, it's the only way.

    15. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Why? Do we need more of them?

      (Actually after some background reading I see they are endangered so some might argue we do need more of them)

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    16. Re:Sharks don't kill very many people by youngone · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you're correct. Also lots of poaching in Pacific Island nations' waters

  3. A few sacrificed to save the rest by TWX · · Score: 0

    Sorry Japan, India, Israel, and Florida, but your sacrifice will serve the greater good.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  4. The biomes / currents comment is crap. by Harlequin80 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Irukanji jellyfish is an extremely fucking nasty box jellyfish which is predominately found off the north coast of Australia. Originally it was thought to be localised to that area but they now know they are far more distributed. This jelly fish is the one that has been found off the coast of Japan, India, and Florida. But the thing is they are tiny, about 1cm3 so unless you are getting instances of the syndrome they are really hard to detect.

    There is nothing about changing currents or biomes that can be tied to the location of those creatures. They are just really really small so unless you are looking for them you won't see them. I mean it took researchers 12 years to find the damn things in the first place when the syndrome was originally identified and they knew where to look.

    1. Re:The biomes / currents comment is crap. by blogagog · · Score: 0

      *gasp*

      *whisper* You said 'fuck'. Don't worry. I won't tell on you.

  5. Jellyfish Week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's time for jellyfish week!

  6. I can't watch by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Before I read the summary, can someone tell me if this is a story about Australian death adders? Those goddamn things scare the crap out of me, so if it's about them I'm outta here.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:I can't watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... a story about Australian death adders ...

      The Australian death adder is one of the few land snakes that can swim. So a story about Australian jellyfish might include a death adder.

    2. Re: I can't watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have discovered the rattlesnake can swim.

    3. Re:I can't watch by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      Why those ones in particular? What about King Browns, or Red Belly Blacks? Red Bellys are pretty good swimmers too.....

    4. Re:I can't watch by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why those ones in particular? What about King Browns, or Red Belly Blacks? Red Bellys are pretty good swimmers too.....

      You're really trying to mess with my sleep, aren't you? If I get alcohol poisoning tonight, I'm blaming you.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:I can't watch by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      ... a story about Australian death adders ...

      The Australian death adder is one of the few land snakes that can swim. So a story about Australian jellyfish might include a death adder.

      Interesting, I had assumed nearly all land snakes were good swimmers as in Australia they all seem pretty decent swimmers. had a number of close calls with black snakes and browns in swimming holes here over the years.

  7. Re:Life saving gift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whose ass?

  8. one that relies on beer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    New methods for collecting venom—including one that relies on beer

    How's that beer tasting? Need a refill? Hey, how about you squeeze that little jelly thing into a test tube while I grab you another!

    1. Re: one that relies on beer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Beer method:
      Step 1 - hold my beer...

  9. Billions of Dollars. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Venoms are already the basis of a handful of FDA-approved drugs that have generated billions for the pharma industry.

    Never mind the patients that have been saved, lets worry about Big Pharma profits!

    Because all medicinal breakthroughs should only benefit the rich right?

  10. Is it more dangerous than selfies ? by terminal.dk · · Score: 1

    I read that slefies kills moe people than sharks every year. Is this fist more dangerous than selfies ? Or are selfies still on top as the most dangerous animal in the world ?

  11. How many... by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    ...divers does the Army have??? Maybe the Navy is running a covert jellyfish operation to get the Army out of the diving business.

  12. I'm not going to read past the title by argStyopa · · Score: 2

    Seriously, ANOTHER thread about Hilary Clinton?

    --
    -Styopa
  13. Happy Jellyday! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...from The Golden Jellyfish!

    Thank you for being a friend
    Travelled down the road and back again
    Your heart is true your a pal and a cosmic nut.

    And if you through a party
    Invited everyone you ever knew
    You would see the biggest gift would be from me
    And the card attached would say thank you for being a friend.

  14. Most venomous animal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama?

  15. Re:Life saving gift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate to dignify this with a response, but... YES! Then I would spend my next fifty healthy years of life thinking about how glad I was that I endured those few moments of discomfort so I could live on to fight homophobia, ignorance, and misuse of the Oxford comma. And also thanking the medical scientists who discovered this super-effective cancer medication and the gay men who ponied up (sorry) the fruits of their labor to make this cure possible.

    Next question?

  16. Venom by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    One species is said to have enough venom at any one time to kill ninety to one hundred and twenty humans.

    Ah, I see they discovered my ex.