Talk:Phlegm

Typo in air pollution

...drying out and irritating parts of the throat. [15] and[16]. I cannot view the sources for this and am not sure what was meant. I have just cut the last frag and its ref. The person with a BYU account that can access the library might want to look into this. PatheticCopyEditor (talk) 03:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Picture

That picture is nasty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.33.123.24 (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Who decided to put it there? ~ Wikipedian19265478 (talk) 04:55, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree also, but also immediately though "oh no, not another 'Wikipedia doesn't censor!' discussion". Jimw338 (talk) 17:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

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.

It can't be worse than if you hadn't coughed it up, right? ~ Wikipedian19265478 (talk) 04:55, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

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.

I followed the link on this page to the article on "Sputum." The phlegm article states that sputum is phlegm that has been expectorated, and also that mucus and phlegm are not the same thing. The sputum article begins by stating that sputum is mucus. There is a contradiction here. 167.206.122.66 (talk) 21:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

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.

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. . ."

Hey, other pages, such as the MCS page promote views which benefit other industries (and at the detriment of sufferers, too). Thus, this is in keeping with the usual wiki standard. Phlegm is no big deal except when you wake up at night choking on it - which is a good reason not to either sleep on one's back or not to tilt one's face too up too much when sleeping on one's side. It is annoying when you choke on it. Then again, having a chronic sore throat when one doesn't even have a cold is also annoying. 24.77.84.175 (talk) 00:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

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.

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)

yeah, the photo isnt that nice, it'll probably scare people away from reading the actual page 82.3.127.54 (talk) 22:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't get the coin for size reference, considering the wide variation in phlegm size depending on how much is actually coughed up. 121.219.227.111 (talk) 05:53, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Most people don't want to look at it. What about if we provide a link to click if people want to see it, and if they don't want to, then they just don't click it? ~ Wikipedian19265478 (talk) 04:55, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Putting aside my incredulity that people can really be so disturbed by seeing a picture of phlegm while they're reading an article about phlegm that they willfully loaded, there's no policy — at least that I could find — barring "disgusting" images from articles save Shocking or explicit pictures should not be used simply to bring attention to an article., to which this obviously doesn't apply. Should we remove the picture of a penis from the Human Penis article? How about the Gangrene article, there are some pretty gnarly pictures over there. Perhaps you folks should take a gander at the Wikipedia is not censored or [Options to not see an image] pages. Or maybe just don't look up the wiki article for phlegm if the very sight of it disgusts you so. 174.102.196.179 (talk)

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

Why don't we also change the ph to a f? Flem is nice and easy to read. (Nobody ever said that English actually makes sense!) ~ Wikipedian19265478 (talk) 04:55, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

But, if phlegm had the ph as an f, it would be "Flegm" 152.37.135.51 (talk) 20:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

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.

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)

Sources

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

the photo

what exactly is a photo comparing it to a quarter proving? not all loogies are the same size. 199.117.69.8 (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be quicker, clearer, and more common to say "lower respiratory system" ...

... instead of "the respiratory system, excluding that from the nasal passages" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx (talk • contribs) 02:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Yellow to Brown Phlegm Cure?..........

Spores of mold if inhaled can create a nasty infection in those who are not immune to it. I had a job in Green House and I was cleaning up the molded black dead decomposed leaves from the base of the potted plants of Geraniums. As I would touch these decomposed leaves I could see the spores come off the black mold as if like smoke. Inhaling these spores created a nasty nasel and throat infection. I cured this infection simply by eating some of the nasty black decomposed leaves from the base of the Geranium. This made me immune to the spores. 108.81.134.236 (talk) 00:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Malaysia Bird's Nest (edible phlegm)

Interesting thing I came across today watching a cooking show......

In Malaysia they eat the a certain birds (which is unknown to me) and apparently its used for birds next soup --> Edible_bird's nest

Im not a good wiki user, but should shit also be listed here?

WP:OVERLINK

Greetings! I did the following changes to the article:

Four humours were redirecting to humorism that was already linked in the same sentence.
Black bile was redirecting to melancholia. However, melancholia has been described as a mere consequence of excess black bile; the link was not pertaining to "black pile" itself.
Yellow bile was redirecting to humorism that was already linked in the article.
Blood did not define "Blood (humor)" at all. Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 10:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Treatment

This article would benefit from a section on how excessive phlegm can be treated. It ought to go without saying that avoiding the triggers is good, but all other things being equal (you can't make the world less polluted or cure yourself of an undiagnosed disease), what can be done to make phlegm/mucus production decrease? Correctrix (talk) 05:59, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Phlegm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101009064912/http://emedicine.medscape.com:80/article/866872-overview to http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/866872-overview#aw2aab6b3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:47, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Bronchitis

What is the reason for the statement, under illness, that "and only bacterial infections, which are rare, are to be treated with an antibiotic". Treatment of bacterial infections is not relevant to either bronchitis or phlegm.203.80.61.102 (talk) 01:22, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Phlegm vs. Mucus

The introduction to the article describes phlegm as mucus, at least as a certain type. But then later it contrasts phlegm and mucus as if they are exclusive, not that one is a subset of the other. This seems self-contradictory. LaCienegaBlvd (talk) 07:21, 27 October 2024 (UTC)