Healthcare & Medicine Snake Bites in Nigeria: Treatment, Myths, and Prevention

Snake bites are frightening because they feel sudden and uncontrollable. Yet medical evidence from Nigeria indicates that most serious harm arises not from the bite itself, but from subsequent events. Understanding how treatment works, why certain myths persist, and what prevention entails helps reduce risk without panic or blame.



This article focuses on what medicine supports, what evidence discourages, and how everyday environments shape exposure.

How snake bites are treated in practice​

The only specific treatment for systemic snakebite envenoming is antivenom. It works by neutralising venom circulating in the bloodstream and is used when clinical signs and symptoms indicate envenoming. Not every bite requires antivenom; many bites inject little or no venom, and doctors decide based on observed effects rather than fear alone.

Equally important is supportive care. This includes managing pain, monitoring breathing, controlling bleeding, treating shock, cleaning wounds, and preventing infection. Nigerian data from experienced centres show that when antivenom and supportive care are available and used appropriately, in-hospital mortality can remain close to 1–2%—far lower than untreated outcomes reported in some regions.

Why some “treatments” cause harm​

Across Nigeria, certain first-aid practices remain common: cutting or sucking the wound, applying tourniquets tightly, and using herbs, chemicals, fuel, ice, or heat. These actions often feel decisive and reassuring. Medical studies, however, consistently show they do not neutralise venom and instead increase tissue damage, infection, and complications.

WHO and regional African guidelines explicitly discourage these practices because they delay effective care and worsen outcomes. Their persistence reflects history and access gaps, not ignorance. Where hospitals were distant or unaffordable, people relied on what was available. Today, the challenge is aligning long-held beliefs with current evidence.

Why myths spread faster than evidence​

Snakebite myths spread easily because they are simple, visual, and shared in moments of fear. Medical treatment, by contrast, can seem complex and uncertain. Bridging this gap requires explaining not only what to avoid but also why medical guidance has changed. Public health education is most effective when it respects context rather than dismissing tradition.

Prevention without fear​

Snakebite prevention is less about constant alertness and more about environmental management. Snakes are drawn to shelter, shade, and prey—especially rodents. Overgrown vegetation, piles of debris, open gaps in buildings, and poor waste control quietly increase risk.

Evidence-based prevention focuses on:

• Clearing bushes and tall grass around homes
• Reducing rodent populations through safe food storage and waste management
• Sealing gaps under doors, windows, and walls
• Using screens and avoiding leaving doors open at night in high-risk areas

These measures reduce encounters without turning daily life into a state of alarm.

So what matters most?​

Snakebite outcomes improve when systems support early care, myths are replaced with evidence, and environments are managed thoughtfully. Treatment works. Prevention works. The challenge is making both consistently available and understood.

Seen this way, snakebite is not a mystery or a moral test. It is a manageable health risk, shaped by access, information, and the spaces people live in.