Talk:Cough

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the brain, nerves and nervous system.

Medicine High‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Cough.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

300 mph?

Seems VERY farfetched guys... --M1xmast3r 19:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and unless a reference is provided, I am removing the statement. This is a Mach number of 0.44 in the standard atmosphere. Perhaps superman could blow this hard. jcordova 00:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General cleanup

This page seems incomplete at best. I tried cleaning up a couple of paragraphs in the "causes" section, but there's a lot of room for improvement. As for the topic of defecation suggested above, I hope this otherwise innocuous subject does not become a target of immature editing, as many other pages (like some of the human sexuality) have. jcordova 00:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"-although this may result in choking instead."

In the introduction - what does this mean? Can coughing cause choking? Or is it trying to say that not coughing would cause choking? Mortsggah 05:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steruphilia

I would like to see documentation for "steruphilia" which someone entered in June 2007, claiming it is the "love of the the sound of coughing or sneezing." I cannot find any reference to this word that does not lead back to the Wikipedia article.

Morning/Evening

Why do some coughs only occur for the most part in the morning and/or evening?

Note: I've put this back, as WDU removed it. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Questions The link provided indicates the talk page is for questions, as well as discussion about the article it self. If discussion isn't an area for questions I don't know what is. The article doesn't adress this issue, I believe that maybe it should.

I'm assuming you are referring to me. The talk page is for questions about the ARTICLE, not questions about the topic. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide, and WP:TALK states "The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page." The page you found is for questions about editing pages. If you think the pages should address the issue, feel free to research the internet and add any information you find to the page - if one of the editors knew the answer, it would probably already be on the page. Try the reference desk. WLU 18:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some coughs can be reduced and stopped after reducing the breathing volume of air and encouraging the use of continual nasal breathing, morning coughs can be due to a number of factors that exacerbates habitual hidden hyperventilation during sleep. a) lying flat (horizontal) b) mouth breathing c) air in the bedroom is to dry and warm d) drinking milk, caffeine, alcohol before going to sleep e) lying on your back. I would like to put the link *Coughing, tips to help stop a coughing fit. on to the article page. Alexspence (talk) 20:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be inappropriate to have this link on the page; it's a fringe theory. Tb (talk) 21:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

theobromine treatment claim

I would like to comment on the claim "50 grams of dark chocolate may be an effective treatment for a persistent cough". The article cited as source [Usmani et al., 2004] is in my opinion not sufficient to support this claim. The authors point out the potential of Theobromine as an antitussant. They also point out that there is a clear dose-response relationship in the effectiveness of Theobromine in reducing capsaicin-induced coughing in humans, explained by a dose-dependent inhibition of the vagus nerve. This is also demonstrated in nerve preparations in vitro. But the authors do not suggest that it would be effective to resort to selfmedication using chocolate, nor do they actually give any advise regarding a recommended dose. Using an article from the reference section of the cited article [Mumford et al., Eur Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (1996) 51 : 319–325], it is possible to calculate the concentration of Theobromine for Hershey's dark chocolate bars, but this is a completely different context. As in the current version of the "Cough" article the recommendation of 50g of dark chocolate is actually given as a treatment suggestion, this could invite readers to engage in potentially harmful selftreatment. Not that chocolate might cause harm, but the dose suggestion should be based on clinical trials with patients actually suffering from the condition mentioned (persistent cough) and should be expressed preferrably in mg/kg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.120.92.229 (talk) 15:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

I would have though it'd be more useful to give the pronunciation of "tussis" rather than "cough"! I'd add it but I don't know who it's pronounced =]Wolfmankurd (talk) 17:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Tussis" is fairly self-explanatory. "Cough, on the other hand, uses the grouping "ough", which has various pronunciations "cough," "tough," "though," "plough".

During Injection.

Coughing during an injection does not lessen the effect of pain. There is a greater chance of more pain due to the area to be injected being jiggled about while coughing. Ask a phlebotomist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.37.58 (talk) 20:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Continuosly coughing during infection can also cause vomiting Tanaya Aaditya Samdurkar (talk) 16:36, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pyschogenic cough

The article contradicts itself about psychogenic coughs. It says "Cough may also be psychogenic, which is different from habit coughing and tic coughing", and "... and the cough is often called a "psychogenic cough" (also known as a "habit cough" or "tic cough")". Which one of these is correct? GIrving (talk) 12:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to comment on this, too. Which is correct? Jammycaketin (talk) 10:36, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other animals

This article only covers coughing in the context of one species, it should be expanded to it's true context. -Craig Pemberton (talk) 10:49, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In argument now, the citation given is a secondary source against another citation, but doesn't explicitly state that marine mammals can't "cough", but simply states that marine mammals don't have a "cough" reflex. That strikes me as a potentially different thing and without an academically sound primary source reference explicitly stating that marine animals don't "cough", I'm inclined to think it's not worth mentioning and should be removed without a substantial reference clearly stating that a marine mammal doesn't have any corollary to a land mammal's "cough" . 2601:204:C002:7081:BE5F:F4FF:FE35:1B41 (talk) 05:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whooping cough

Why is there no mention or link to this in the Cough page? 86.128.241.192 (talk) 03:10, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 04:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image

I am not really seeing the second image as an improvement. The second image looks like someone talking. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Parasympathetic cough?

There is also a cough caused by hearing someone else coughing which I think is called "A parasympathetic reflex", or has it been disproven in some way? 84.94.119.60 (talk) 06:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cough. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101001113940/http://www.nlhep.org/books/pul_Pre/chronic-cough.html to http://www.nlhep.org/books/pul_Pre/chronic-cough.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:06, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alligators

I've just read the following sentence:

She wished she could be an alligator, the one creature on earth physically incapable of coughing. (Katie Roiphe, Uncommon Arrangements, p. 89)

Reading through our article, I see this is clearly wrong. But maybe it was referring to marine animals, in which case it would have the barest spark of truth. Can anyone clarify this? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:36, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I know this has been nearly 2 years since message was posted but I didn't anything about alligators in the reference section. Looks like marine animal can't cough. Alligators seem to cough. Adding that to article. Cwater1 (talk) 23:48, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: Add reference to Behavioral Cough Suppression Therapy

Relevant because there haven't been any new cough molecules approved by the FDA since 1958 (Dextromethorphan). Also The FDA has never approved any drugs for chronic cough, which means that people who suffer from Chronic Cough/ Refractory Chronic Cough do not have any medical treatment available. This is one in ten adults, more or less (https://openres.ersjournals.com/content/7/2/00160-2021). However over the last few years consistent evidence has been emerging on the effectiveness of Behavioral Cough Suppression Therapy (BCST), or cough desesitization therapy. I will paste some randomised control trials and other rigurous publications below.

BCST seems to be similar with physical therapy, in that it uses highly specialized excercises in an attempt to "rewire" the neuropathways that cause constant coughing. In the USA it is practiced by Speech and Language Pathologists with decent success rates.

Results of three randomized control trials: RCT1, RCT2 and RCT3 on combination therapy.

I have been researching this topic out of personal interest and happy to draft suggested changes and share here for review? Shmirghel (talk) 05:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources provided are preliminary, individual clinical trials, i.e., primary research, with no evidence that BCST is an accepted mainstream clinical practice; see WP:MEDORG. The sources do not meet WP:MEDASSESS (hierarchy of evidence in left pyramid) which explains the higher level of clinical evidence needed for coverage in the encyclopedia.

The FDA doesn't develop drugs and hasn't approved cough medicines probably because they don't work. It is unlikely a cough suppressant would be developed by a company as a novel type of prescription drug because coughing is a normal response to throat irritation.

If/when BCST is more widely accepted in clinical medicine and there is a WP:MEDRS review discussing it, then it would be appropriate to consider for the article. Zefr (talk) 18:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there are several cough supressants in late stage development right now across several categories. P2X3 inhibitors like Gefapixant are already available in Switzerland and in Japan. The FDA refused approval late last year because of the way data was collected in the clinical trials - indeed, counting coughs reliably over time is a hard problem in respiratory research. Bellus Pharma also has a molecule in late stage development and they were aquired by GSK who is now bringing this molecule to market.

Behavioral COugH Suppression Therapy is widely accepted and used with patients every day by Speech and Language Pathologists all over the world and is part of guidelines from ASHA - American Speech-Language-Hearing Association . Some of the science cited in the suggested edit includes rigurous randomized control trials.

What I am saying is, modern approach to cough therapy, including BCST, deserves consideration. Shmirghel (talk) 06:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]