Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Snake bites pose a significant public health concern in Sri Lanka, where misconceptions and myths can hinder effective treatment and increase the risk of complications. This study examined community beliefs, risk factors, and preventive practices regarding snakebites in Sri Lanka and compared them with global patterns. OBJECTIVE: To debunk common myths about snake bites in Sri Lanka, providing accurate information to guide appropriate responses and ensure proper management with consideration of world wide scenarios. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional study was done in a village First Mile Post - Padaviya, situated in Sri Lanka's North Central. The head of the family was interviewed with a pre- designed, pre-tested schedule. One prevalent myth is the belief that cutting and sucking the bite site removes venom. However, this practice is ineffective and potentially harmful, introducing bacteria and worsening tissue damage. Similarly, applying a tourniquet is often advised but can restrict blood flow, leading to severe complications. RESULTS: The claim that identifying the snake species is crucial for antivenom treatment is also misleading. Most antivenoms are polyvalent, meaning they can neutralize venom from a wide range of snake species. Additionally, the notion that snake charmers can safely handle and cure snake bites is unfounded. While they may possess traditional knowledge, they lack the necessary medical expertise for proper treatment. Furthermore, the belief that eating certain plants or herbs can neutralize snake venom is scientifically unsupported and can delay or prevent proper medical attention. Survey findings revealed that 78.2% of the community believed in snake-related myths, reflecting a strong cultural influence consistent with results from India and Ghana, while only 21.8% rejected such beliefs. Environmental and occupational exposures were identified as major risk factors: 62% of respondents reported overgrown grass near homes, 55.6% were engaged in paddy cultivation, and 42% slept on mats or in paddy fields, paralleling evidence from Nepal, Bangladesh, and Myanmar. Russell's viper was the leading cause of bites (57.3%), with most incidents (76.6%) occurring in paddy fields. Preventive practices were limited; although 94.3% used torches at night, only 8.1% wore boots and 4.8% wore long trousers, echoing global trends of low adoption of protective clothing due to socioeconomic and cultural barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Similarly, the misconception that snake bites are more likely to occur at night is untrue. Snake bites can happen at any time, with a higher risk during the day when snakes are more active. These findings demonstrate that local experiences of snakebite align closely with global evidence, underscoring the need for targeted interventions that integrate cultural understanding, education on myths, and promotion of cost-effective protective measures to reduce morbidity and mortality.