Talk:Phlegm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. |
| Start | This page has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance assessment scale |
Contents |
[edit] Are
Are there any ill-effects to swallowing phlegm? Yes, hook worms.Aaronchall 03:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Swallowing phlegm does not directly make you sicker, but you will be consuming the bacteria residing in the phlegm. That doesn't exactly make the recovery process any easier.
Is it best to cough up phlegm, or leave it to do whatever it does?
There may or may not be anything harmful in the phlegm. Swallowing is generally not harmful. It might be mucuous and whatever is left over of immune reactions. There doesn't have to be pathogenic bacteria in it. Whatever was it typically won't survive ingestion anyway. What is important is that it gets out of your respiratory system and not near anyone else. Note that this is your typical cold or response from a similar illness. A parasite infection or toxic irritants are things you want out of your body if possible.
[edit] Phlegm vs. Sputum
This article refers (but does not link) to Sputum, any reason for that? Also the difference is not entirely clear even when reading both articles. Clarification would be much appreciated.
- From a quick read of Dictionary.com, it appears sputum is *any* matter that is coughed up, including saliva and foreign material. Whereas phlegm is specifically a thick, sticky, stringy mucus secreted by the mucous membrane. It would seem phlegm is just one form of sputum.
[edit] Solid Phlegm?
Does anybody know if what I am coughing up is solid phlegm, I'd like to know if it safe to Cough up because I'm worried I might not be coughing up phlegm. It's yellow and hard and it smells terribly. Can anyone help me on this? --Jack Cox 14:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
- These may be Tonsilloliths.
[edit] Commercial link?
The link to the Traditional Medicine article seems somewhat inappropriate to me. Not that we should have a bias against Chinese medicine, but having the only link be to such, as well as the fact that the author has businesses selling herbal products, seems against the spirit of Wiki.
From his site:
"Subhuti Dharmananda helped initiate People's Herbs Incorporated, All-The-Tea Company, and Dharma Consulting International. . ."
[edit] Brownish gray phlegm
I added the information on this variant because I researched everything I could find on the Web and couldn't find any other references to it. When I saw my pulmonary specialist yesterday (I have COPD), I finally got an answer on it. I added it so that the next person who is worried has at least one place on the Web where they can find an answer to what it is they are coughing up. No general doctors could tell me what it was.
[edit] Photo
Please don't include a photo. Ever. ;) 65.92.207.152 00:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Why not? Just because it's disgusting doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a photo of it. Klosterdev 13:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
yah~ a photo for different kind of phlegm will be awesome --202.12.95.13 01:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Please remove the picture and include a healthier one (clear or white); it is truly disgusting. --86.60.38.19 (talk) 12:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Phlem
Is it okay to omit the G, as it isn't necessary?
sure, and why don't we just omit the 'k' in 'know' while we're at it. heck! we don't even need the 'w'! The Fletch
[edit] Hazardous to dogs?
I find the claim extremely dubious, and I put a sources tag on til someone can back this up with veterinary sources.
[edit] Humourism?
Enough said. I can't see the value of this except SOLELY as a historical reference. The current reference makes it look like a legitimate part of modern theory and thought related to phlegm. The theory of humours has been disproven beyond all discussion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.171.155.96 (talk) 16:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC).
- Agree, the theory of Humourism is misconceived and completely ridiculous. Still, it turned out to be a real die-hard, misguiding medical thinking for over 2,000 years, responsible for endless medical treatments using bloodletting - the most common "treatment" less than 150 years ago. As such it deserves mention, not for the insights, but for the phenomenal sidetrack. It should serve as a warning against theoretical speculation not founded in empirical observation, and perhaps inject a dose of humble attitude into everybody regarding the limited insights of today. After all, which of today's theories may remain essentially uncontested for the next 2,000 years? Power.corrupts (talk) 09:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
