Talk:Iron lung

message: https://www.wnyc.org/story/from-polio-to-covid--the-evolution-of-intensive-care  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.63.90.74 (talk) 10:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: The line: 'The use of iron lungs has almost completely ceased' prompted me to go to google to search for who's still using one.  How about listing those few living individuals who are still using an iron lung?
I wanted to ask first, since it would be my first post, and I'm unsure of protocols.
:Negative pressure ventilators are still made (at least two different brands), so I think the sentence you mention is a factual error. --Ekko 11:24, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, iron lungs are still used for postoperative ventilaton of children after certain kinds of heart surgery --Ekko 10:56, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment 1

message: Are there any lifestyle alterations required due to treatment or technique?
What would you think? They are stuck in an iron lung with only their head sticking out.  Do you think they go down to the bar every night at 9:30? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.13.83 (talk) 21:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  question 

message: For how long are patients required to stay in the apparatus? How do they live in the lung if they are required to stay in it for 24 hours daily.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.203.251.58 (talk) 02:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  question 

message: Why would anyone be in an iron lung when modern ventilators are available?
: I cite from the article: the iron lung mimics the physiologic action of breathing: by periodically altering intrathoracic pressure, it causes air to flow in and out of the lungs. The iron lung is a form of non-invasive therapy..The key words are physiologic and non-invasive. --Ekko 08:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Those who have Ondine's Curse do not need a ventilator when they are awake, only when the sleep. The iron lung works well for them because there are no tubes to insert or remove, and they can sleep lying in the iron lung.--RLent 19:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  question 

message: Negative pressure ventilators are still manufactured. So when the article says that they are still used, despite the problems with replacement parts, this is nonsense. And positive pressure ventilators are not a new thing either. Heinrich Dräger patented his Pulmotor (a simple positive pressure ventilator) in 1907. --Ekko 07:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So many articles, so few hours.... In my schedule I plan to have my excellent (norwegian) article ready by autumn, so after that perhaps... --Ekko 07:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Iron lung is not necessarily an old ventilator 

message: Just curious about how iron lung patients managed to, well, you know, if they were in the iron lung 24/7... —  Rickyrab | Talk 17:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the diseases that  put them in an iron lung often involve paralysis, I would assume they are catheritized like other paralyzed patients.LiPollis (talk) 17:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: How'd they "go to the bathroom"?

message: Is it worth making mention of this expression for laziness?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.37.212.89 (talk) 01:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Wouldn't work in an iron lung"

message: The article states:  This, in turn, causes the pressure of the air inside the lungs to fill (it becomes negative, relative to the atmosphere),
Is the meaning really that the air pressure inside the lung falls which causes the lungs to fill up when the air pressure inside the chamber increases.  I'm not sure of the meaning of "causes the pressure of the air to fill". I hope someone knowledgable can correct or change if needed.  I'm not goning to make any change to the article myself due to a total lack of qualification.  
Seki1949 (talk) 19:06, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible error "fill" or "fall" 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Womanonsideinlung.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: According to WP:CommonName articles should use the most common name for their article titles.  For instance, see the Big Dig for the Central Artery/Tunnel Project in Boston, or Bill Clinton for the president (or Mother Teresa, North Korea, the Nazi Party).  Therefore shouldn't this article's title be "iron lung" and not "negative pressure ventilator"? --Bruce Hall (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree completely.  Iron lungs in the news a lot recently and none of the mainstream news articles use the term "Negative pressure ventilator." -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 20:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

text: I also concur.  Due to the polio epidemic of the 1950s, anyone living at that time probably knows the term all too well.  BMJ-pdx (talk) 01:10, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change article title to "iron lung"? 

message: Entirely US Centric. This article's parochialism is astounding. It has even swiped and obliterated the common name "Iron Lung"! Eddaido (talk) 21:39, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Globalize 

message: Iron lungs are not used today. Its been many decades since they were replaced by more sophisticated devices. However, in the past they saved many lives esp. from Polio. 688dim (talk) 23:17, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There are still some people using them today.  About 10 in the US alone. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 20:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Mentioned for historical reasons- not in use today!

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Iron lung. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081022162511/http://www.cnn.com:80/2008/US/05/28/iron.lung.death.ap/index.html? to http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/28/iron.lung.death.ap/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:07, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article has for Biphasic cuirass ventilation "Main article: Biphasic cuirass ventilation", however that is a redirect to Mechanical ventilation which only mentions it in section 'Negative pressure machines'... which starts with "Main article: Negative pressure ventilator", but that is a redirect back to Iron lung. Batternut (talk) 00:39, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I had in mind mentioning Alexander Graham Bell's prototype cuirass, as historical interest (source ) - but where should it go? Batternut (talk) 00:45, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biphasic cuirass ventilation 

message: The second image down labelled "Iron lung ward filled with polio patients", widely copied on the Internet, is actually from a staged shot of iron lungs not of a hospital ward according to this page https://amhistory.si.edu/polio/historicalphotos/index.htm Also discussed on a pro-vaccine page. It is illustrative and not referred to in the text, so I propose removing it. --Hartley Patterson (talk) 18:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting links. I tend to agree with removal of the image from this article. Batternut (talk) 19:10, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

text: I came here to make the same suggestion and give the same link. Either the picture info should be corrected to reflect the fact that it's a publicity photo, or the photo should be removed completely. Country Wife~enwiki (talk) 05:02, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrongly labelled image 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Iron lung. 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/20110615142114/http://www3.lehigh.edu/engineering/about/drinker.asp to http://www3.lehigh.edu/engineering/about/drinker.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071223223131/http://www.fdcw.unimaas.nl/personal/WebSitesMWT/Wackers/proefschrift.html to http://www.fdcw.unimaas.nl/personal/WebSitesMWT/Wackers/proefschrift.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iron lung. 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/20090423113840/http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~dpower/resp/exchange.htm to http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~dpower/resp/exchange.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:42, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I agree with the flag saying "This article's lead section does not adequately summarize key points of its contents," and so I've overhauled the lede -- adding a simple description of what the device is (why wasn't this there before?), with refs cited for the added material.  
Three detailed paragraphs at the end of the lede were moved into their own new subsection: "Design and function," and a more fundamentally descriptive opening two paragraphs were added to that section, with ref cites.
To that section, I've also added info on the powering of the iron lung, and summary paragraphs about large and small variations on the iron lung (again, with ref cites, though I'd like to see some better refs on the small "exovent" / "Cuirass ventilator").
:~ Penlite (talk) 12:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clearer lede & new 'Design & function' section 

message: There were numerous errors in the original 1st paragraph of the lede.
The 1st sentence originally read:
:A negative pressure ventilator, also known as iron lung (colloquialism) or  pulmotor (generic trademark), is a mechanical respirator 
This sentence had two fundamental errors: 
* It implied that all "negative pressure ventilators" were "iron lungs," when, in fact, iron lungs are just one type of NPV. There are several others, some itemized in the source (a professional medical journal) cited in my revision of that sentence. (As soon as I can, i'll recreate the "negative pressure ventilator" page, which currently redirects here, and list, on that page, the various types of NPVs, including iron lung, with appropriate wikilinks.  But if anyone can get to it before me, go for it. (Strongly recommend looking at the first several refs cited in this article for various NPV devices to list in the NPV article.)
* Stated that the "pulmotor" was the same thing as an iron lung / negative-pressure ventilator. It is a radically different device, and is more focused on positive pressure ventilation (directly forcing air into the lungs through the airway), than on negative (drawing air from the lungs by negative pressure -- partial vacuum) -- though it does both. Moreover, the Pulmotor works entirely by directly altering pressure and flow on the person's airway, while the iron lung operates by directly altering pressure on the person's torso.
The 2nd sentence in lede also had a couple of major misstatements. It said the patient in an iron lung could...:
* "...breathe on his or her own."
* "...breathe... in a normal manner"
These two things are essentially the OPPOSITE of what is happening, per several of the cited sources.  The iron lung forces the person's body to inhale and exhale, as a result of abnormal external forces that it generates -- as several of the cited refs clearly explain. While the patient may have the ability to contribute to the breathing, through their own physical action, that autonomous act is not made possible by the iron lung, and the patient is not entirely breathing "on his or her own," let alone in a "normal manner."
:~ Penlite (talk) 14:50, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixed numerous errors in lede, 1st paragraph. 

message: It seems to me, an iron lung would be preferable to a ventilator.  It seems a lot less intrusive to the patient.  Am I crazy?  108.200.234.93 (talk) 18:44, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Covid-19 

message: Is it worth mentioning that a patient in an iron lung is seen in the 1959 biopic The Five Pennies ?  It's authentic, being contemporaneous with the polio epidemic of that time. BMJ-pdx (talk) 00:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seen in ''[[The Five Pennies]]'' 

message: It's pretty obviously just MS Paint, default colors and all, are there no better diagrams or anyone who can make a better diagram to fit this? 96.66.39.9 (talk) 21:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can we do better than the MS Paint diagram of how the machine works?