Editing Candiru (fish) (section)

===Historical accounts===
The earliest published report of candiru attacking a human host comes from German biologist [[Carl Friedrich Philipp von Martius|C. F. P. von Martius]] in 1829. The biologist never actually observed this; rather, von Martius was told about it by an interpreter relaying the speech of the native people of the area, who reported that men would tie ligatures around their penises while going into the river to prevent this from happening.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gonzalez |first=Alyssa |date=2023-03-20 |title=The Candiru: A Six-Inch SciCom Failure |url=https://www.talksciencetome.com/2023/03/20/the-candiru-a-six-inch-scicom-failure/ |access-date=2024-04-16 |website=Talk Science to Me |language=en-US}}</ref> Other sources also suggest that other tribes in the area used various forms of protective coverings for their genitals while bathing, though it was also suggested that these were to prevent bites from [[piranha]]. Martius also speculated that the fish were attracted by the "odor" of urine.<ref>von Martius, C. F. P. 1829.Preface, p. viii, of van Spix, J. B., and Agassiz, L. Selecta Genera et Species Piscium ouos in Itinere ocr Brnsiliam annis 1817-20 Collcgit ... Dr. J. B. de Spix, etc. Monachii, 1829.</ref> Later experimental evidence has shown this to be false, as the fish actually hunt by sight and have no attraction to urine at all.<ref name="Spotte-etal">{{Cite journal |last1=Spotte |first1=Stephen |last2=Petry |first2=Paulo |last3=Zuanon |first3=Jansen A.S. |year=2001 |title=Experiments on the feeding behavior of the hematophagous candiru |journal=Environmental Biology of Fishes |volume=60 |issue=4 |pages=459–464 |doi=10.1023/A:1011081027565|s2cid=40239152 }}</ref>

Another report, from French naturalist [[Francis de Laporte de Castelnau|Francis de Castelnau]] in 1855, relates an allegation by local Araguay fisherman, saying that it is dangerous to urinate in the river as the fish "springs out of the water and penetrates into the urethra by ascending the length of the liquid column."<ref>CASTELNAU, FRANCIS DE. 1855. Expedition dans les Partics Cent&es de I'AmPrique du Sud, 1843 a 1847. Animaux Nouveaux ou Rares-Zoology. Paris, 3: 50, p1. 24, fig. 4.</ref> While Castelnau himself dismissed this claim as "absolutely preposterous", and the [[fluid mechanics]] of such a maneuver defy the laws of physics, it remains one of the more stubborn myths about the candiru. It has been suggested this claim evolved out of the real observation that certain species of fish in the Amazon will gather at the surface near the point where a [[urine stream]] enters, having been attracted by the noise and agitation of the water.<ref name=Gudger/>

In 1836, [[Eduard Poeppig]] documented a statement by a local physician in [[Pará]], known only as Dr. Lacerda, who offered an eyewitness account of a case where a candiru had entered a human orifice. However, it was lodged in a native woman's vagina, rather than a [[male urethra]]. He relates that the fish was extracted after external and internal application of the juice from a Xagua plant (believed to be a name for ''[[Genipa americana]]''). Another account was documented by biologist George A. Boulenger from a Brazilian physician, named Dr. Bach, who had examined a man and several boys whose penises had been amputated. Bach believed this was a remedy performed because of parasitism by candiru, but he was merely speculating, as he did not speak his patients' language.<ref>BWLENGER, G. A. 1898a. Exhibition of specimens, and remarks upon the habits of the siluroid fish, Vandellia cirrhosu. Proc. Zool. Sot. London [1897], p. 90 I.</ref> American biologist Eugene Willis Gudger noted that the area which the patients were from did not have candiru in its rivers, and suggested the amputations were much more likely the result of having been attacked by piranha.<ref name=Gudger/>

In 1891, naturalist Paul Le Cointe provides a rare first-hand account of a candiru entering a human body, and like Lacerda's account, it involved the fish being lodged in the vaginal canal, not the urethra. Le Cointe supposedly removed the fish himself, by pushing it forward to disengage the spines, turning it around and removing it head-first.<ref>Le Cointe, Paul. 1922. L'Amazonie Bresilienne: Le Pays; Ses Inhabitants, scs Ressources. Notes et Statistiques jusqu'en 1920. Paris, II: 365.</ref>

However, the veracity of both Le Cointe's<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-09-14 |title=What can the candiru (Vandellia cirrhosa) do? - Hektoen International |url=https://hekint.org/2023/09/14/what-can-the-candiru-vandellia-cirrhosa-do/ |access-date=2024-04-16 |website=hekint.org |language=en-US}}</ref> and Poeppig's accounts are questionable, due to a trend of Europeans from various careers residing in Brazil including scientists, "explorers, medical men, and missionaries" regularly using exaggerated accounts of native people to advance their economic and social status through writing and building rapport with others with similar positions.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last=Bauer |first=Irmgard L. |date=2013-03-01 |title=Candiru—A Little Fish With Bad Habits: Need Travel Health Professionals Worry? A Review |url=https://doi.org/10.1111/jtm.12005 |journal=Journal of Travel Medicine |publisher=International Society of Travel Medicine |volume=20 |issue=2 |pages=119–124 |doi=10.1111/jtm.12005 |pmid=23464720 |issn=1195-1982}}</ref>

Gudger, in 1930, noted there have been several other cases reported wherein the fish was said to have entered the vaginal canal, but not a single case of a candiru entering the anus was ever documented. According to Gudger, this lends credence to the unlikelihood of the fish entering the male urethra, based on the comparatively small opening that would accommodate only the most immature members of the species.<ref name="Gudger">{{cite journal|last= Gudger |first= E.W. |date=January 1930 |title= On the alleged penetration of the human urethra by an Amazonian catfish called candiru with a review of the allied habits of other members of the family pygidiidae |journal= The American Journal of Surgery |volume= 8 |issue= 1 |pages= 170–188 |publisher= Elsevier Inc. |type= Print |issn= 0002-9610|doi= 10.1016/S0002-9610(30)90912-9}}</ref>