Jump to content

Talk:Apnea

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

There is a potentially fatal "apneist" technique, believed by some of its practioners to amount to a safe hyperoxygenation of the blood. In fact what allows them to hold their breaths longer is that they have reduced their blood CO2 to abnormally low levels, delaying the time when the buildup of CO2 forces breathing, by a time roughly equal to the time in which produces the amount of the initial CO2 deficit. The danger, as i understand it, is that a sufficient CO2 deficit can hold off the impulse to breathe so long that loss of consciousness occurs first, producing a high likelihood of drowning when the technique is for underwater activities.

IMO, the discussion of ==Apneic oxygenation== is sufficiently hard for lay readers that it might be seen as an endorsement of the technique i am refering to.

And in any case, should the danger of the CO2 deficit technique i refer to perhaps be part of this article? --Jerzy 02:17, 2004 Feb 21 (UTC)

--- Earlier in the article it was mentioned that some people have learned to increase their period of voluntary apnea up to 7 minutes, and it notes that trained free divers hold their breath for a long time. This seems to have introduced the subject of prolonged apnea while diving. However, there is no discussion of how these effects are achieved. Since the article holds out the hope that an increase can be achieved, it seems relevant to point out an obvious (but wrong) path that should not be followed. I have observed a diving instructor warning students on this. If the warning is not clear enough, perhaps it can be improved.

The paragraph on the voluntary hyperventilation technique confusingly contradicts itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justin Stafford (talk • contribs) 18:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for this -- I was one of those who'd thought taking a few extra breaths before diving was a good idea.UrsusMaximus (talk) 18:03, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need to do wiki links for things like 'gas'? Someone reading this article is scarcely likely to wonder what 'gas' means, nor to care. If you follow it to the conclusion half the words in the article would be links, and it would be a mess.

Someone removed most of the legitimate links which are necessary. Have reverted to bring them back. If you think the greater number of them are not necessary, you shouod explain why, not just remove them almost all.Dieter Simon 23:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I'm not at all a medical professional, but I do have a question someone might be able to answer: is there any risk to breathing primarily through your mouth as opposed to your nose? I've heard it said that so-called "mouth breathers" have a harder time being energetic than the people who breathe through their noses. Jaerune 19:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the keyword to apnoea

[edit]

Please do not change "apnea" to "apnoea". This article was obviously created with the American spelling, or at some time changed to the American spelling. All occasions show the American spelling, it is not on to suddenly change some words to the British spelling. We must respect this. Have changed the article to wwhat it was before. Dieter Simon 21:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree at present but if the so called "Americans" start defining it differently, then there should be a page with the present meaning one way or the other.

What about Respiratory arrest ?

[edit]

not much difference, I would say... -- Robodoc.at 22:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Does one lead to the other??? Alec - U.K. 20:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Especially fresh water"?

[edit]

"If a person loses consciousness underwater, especially in fresh water, there is a considerable danger that they will die by drowning."

This is just a personal curiosity - but why is this the case? My only guess is that it has to do with the buoyancy of humans in salt water.

It has to do with osmotic effects. When permeable tissues, e.g. red cells and lungs, are exposed to a non-isotonic solution, water will flow from the region of higher water concentration (fresher solution) to the lower. Consider what happens if you place some blood in fresh water versus in salt water. In salt water the red cells in the blood will lose water and shrivel. In fresh water the red cells will swell until they burst. It is simply much easier to receive irreversible damage to your body in fresh water. --AJim (talk) 18:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am adding a link to the drowning article discussion of secondary drowning. They make the point that hypoxia is usually what kills you, but I thing it is clear that fresh water will do more damage, and the point is that death is more likely to ensue in a fresh water drowning. --AJim (talk) 16:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
However, a detailed drowning discussion plays down the role of osmotic effects. The author agrees that salinity can matter, but not most of the time. --AJim (talk) 17:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Citation Needed' Indeed!

[edit]

Please explain why a simple factual statement along the lines of 'the damage to alveoli caused by smoking reduces gas exchange efficiency' requires a 'citation required' tag. If no one can provide a concrete reason, this bogus tag is going. I didn't write any of the original article btw, just incensed at what seems blatent pro-smoking anti-factual trolling. I also happen to be a smoker, but I'm not an idiot. Blitterbug (talk) 09:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperventilation

[edit]

This section seems to contradict itself. If the effect is false, how can the effect be attributed to anything? 207.59.211.146 (talk) 13:08, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More or less Citation needed

[edit]

Sorry, but I don't see why the statement of the fact, that an untrained person usually cannot voluntarily hold her breath for more than one or two minutes needs a 'citation needed' tag. I would consider this public knowledge.

On the other hand, IMHO the fact, that a healthy adult breathing pure oxygen stores enough of it in her body that it would be sufficient for about an hour, is very interesting and I wonder where this claim comes from. So I allowed myself to add a 'citation needed' tag at this point. (Sorry, if I did something wrong, but usually I only read wikipedia and only edit once in a leap year.)

213.183.85.194 (talk) 13:52, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The tag in question hasn't been justified and I have therefore removed it. If you have reliably sourced evidence to verify that statement, by all means, add it in - but don't contradict common knowledge just because it isn't explicitly documented.--125.237.26.48 (talk) 02:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "...that a healthy adult breathing pure oxygen stores enough of it in her body that it would be sufficient for about an hour" is common knowledge at all, and therefore that phrase does deserve the 'citation needed' flag which it currently has. UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 00:02, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperventilaion again

[edit]

I just read the article to try to understand what is meant medically by apnea, and so far so good. However I read the section on hyperventilation which argues that it is impossible to increase available oxygen by hyper ventilation, because blood in the body is always saturated. It immediately occurred to me that this argument is inadequate and needs further justification. I imagine (but don't know) that the largest part of oxygen contained within the body is present as gas within the lungs, and this acts as a reserve when not breathing. If hyperventilation increases the reserve of oxygen within the lungs, then it is not true that "hyperventilation of normal air cannot increase the amount of oxygen available." Normal breathing is quite shallow and does not fully empty or fill the lungs, so that inevitably they must contain stale air with lowerd oxygen content. If hyperventilation ensures that a dive starts with the maximum of fresh air in the lungs, then it will increase the oxygen available.

I would also note that hyperventilation creats a 'buzz', and people having panic attacks are advised to re-breath into a bag to help calm themselves. The article would seem to imply that these effects have nothing to do with oxygen levels, but entirely co2. Is that really the case, because if not then these examples are evidence of real effects on the body from hyperventilation, presumably due to changed O2 levels, contrary to the assertion that oxygen levels are always unchanged by hyperventilation. Sandpiper (talk) 13:20, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Apnea. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:23, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Apnea. 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:

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) 00:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Apnea&oldid=1198861441"