 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | 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 Bronchospasm.
|
note
editBronchospasm is constriction of the bronchioles, not the bronchi (which do not constrict because they are cartilaginous rather than muscular).
Bronchospasm causes hypoxia, not cyanosis, which is a late sign of the hypoxia bronchospasm can cause.
Is it really important to say that they can be caused by cold housing? 75.61.108.90 (talk) 03:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I was thinking either cold housing needs elaboration or a wiki link as it is somewhat vague. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csylcox (talk • contribs) 15:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
CONCERN: I realize that Wikipedia is peer written and edited, but is it not possible to have this article on Bronchospasm written in intelligible English? The person who wrote the article apparently understands the underlying physiological and biochemical components of an asthma attack, but to someone of my admittedly limited intellectual ability, the article was opaque in the extreme. It seemed that every sentence which purported to explain the dynamics of an asthma attack contained one or more polysyllabic words whose meaning I did not comprehend. It would be wonderful if the author of this article could collaborate with someone who can write for regular folks, or if one of the author's co-workers could undertake re-writing a few of the sentences.
Why is it important for this article to be intelligible? Because there are millions of persons who struggle with asthma, and Wikepedia is an important source of knowledge and understanding. Most of us don't have the specialized vocabulary to make sense of an article written in such esoteric language as this one is, so when we come seeking understanding, we leave with frustration.
This is a problem I encounter frequently, when trying to do research on Wikipedia. The people who know about a topic have their own language for talking about the topic. This works well when talking only to other professionals in the field, but when regular folks want to become part of the conversation, then the use of professional jargon and highly technical language becomes a barrier to understanding and communication. Landon Shultz, Austin, TX Bridgefinder (talk) 22:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)