Talk:Enema

message: Parts of the article are misleading. In particular, the term "alternative health therapies" is double-speak. Therapies are either legitimate practices, or they are not therapies. There is no such thing as "alternative therapies." "Alleged therapies" or "pseudoscientific therapies" would be the appropriate term for "therapies" thare are not endorsed by the mainstream scholarly and medical society. 72.89.117.28 (talk) 06:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Far wose than tone, references to "phosphate" point to Trisodium phosphate, a highly alkaline and caustic chemical.  Phosphate enemas are carefully buffered to present a physiological pH.  Trisodium phosphate, given as an enema, is not particularly better than using other caustics like sodium hydroxide (lye).  The danger here is not in the factuality, which has been changed, but that someone without the appropriate knowledge might actually try it and hurt themselves.  I don't believe that Wikipedia ought to be a nanny, but neither do I believe that erroneous information should be provided that might lead someone to harm. Norm Reitzel (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading information

message: Ritual enemas: from Jared Diamond, The Third Chimpanzee, chapter 11 (at page 201 of the HarperPerennial trade paperback edition of published 1992).
:I have added the reference to the article. When I get time I will check the book. Thanks --Sina 00:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ritual enemas

message: I deleted this bit "Enemas can be dangerous if administered incorrectly, so precautions should be taken to ensure the safety of the person being given the enema." It seems rather silly. Brushing your teeth can be dangerous too since you could poke yourself in the eye. --LeeHunter 00:41, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone who has hand-made sausages can appreciate the dangers of this "enema at the gates"; it only takes the tiniest bit of imagination.  Alternately, a two-minute google search for "ruptured colon" turned up this report from the Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition linking instances of fatal perforations of the intestines to enema use (Constipation, Enema, Disaster!).  Jokes aside, when performing an enema you are essentially pressurizing a very thin-membraned organ (think over-filled balloon) which happens to have access to lots of blood.  If a rupture was small enough for the internal bleeding to not kill the patient, there's still the myriad microbes inhabiting the intestines (E. coli, anyone?) now provided with a handy doorway to the bloodstream as well as the abdomino-pelvic cavity where they can toxify the patient to death.  --Museerouge 17:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is dangerous, and if anyone worked in a hospital, they would know the dangers. It is foolish that medical enemas are sometimes used for non-medical use. Doctors are always advised on the dangers of enema use, as it can rupture, tear or cause internal bleeding of the colon as well as fatal infections, out of all which can result in death in the worst case scenario. LeeHunter, it was unwise to remove the sentence and your analogy with enema administration and brushing yours teeth was incorrect. You need to understand some things are more dangerous than others, and yes, everything in life has dangers, but some have fatal dangers and others have non-fatal, some are high risk and some are low risk; your analogy was the equilavent of saying, crossing the road at a town road is the same as crossing a motorway/highway. It is also worth knowing that during anal sex, there is a high chance of tears in the colon, resulting in blood exposure, and thereon the risk of catching STD's such as HIV/AIDS, and even a higher chance if an enema is used prior to so called anal sex. I will revert back the sentence. --Sina 00:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted text

message: I have placed a tag on the :Clyster page proposing its merger into this article. All it describes are the procedures and popularity of enemas in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, content that hardly warrants an article of its own. If no-one raises any arguments why the articles should stay seperate, I will proceed to merge on 30 May 2007 --Anna512 (talk • contribs) 08:54, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger from [[:Clyster]] 

message: I moved text from Colon hydrotherapy and turned that page into a redirect - it's basically an enema, so I didn't think there was a need for a separate page.  The text seemed to slot nicely into a the existing subsections too.  WLU (talk) 01:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colon hydrotherapy 

message: An enema releases fecal matter from the last 24 hours.  You can purchase an enema bag at the drugstore.  A colonic releases fecal matter from years of accumulations.  You must make an appointment with a colonic hydrotherapist who uses the latest technology in colonic machines that are attached to the plumbing.  Please get your information for Wikipedia from a licensed colonic hydrotherapist.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.228.62.230 (talk) 23:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: colonic hydrotherapy is synonymous with quackery.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.135.33.163 (talk) 12:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  An enema is not a colonic! 

message: fleet enema redirects here but it is never mentioned anywhere in the article.  can we get the word fleet to appear somewhere in this article? Tkjazzer (talk) 04:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that, too.  Isn't "Fleet" a trademark?  I think I've seen one.  If I recall correctly, it's a small, prepackaged disposable enema, available in pharmacies, consisting of a device containing a proprietary liquid, and is considered especially convenient, safe, and sanitary compared to enema bags with home mixed solutions, which may become contaminated during preparation or administrated carelessly in excessive volume.  A parent may feel safe handing the package to a child and telling him or her to administer it in private, and adults suffering malaise may benefit from the convenience. Unfree (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[fleet enema]] 

message: Sorry, but i cant change the reference link, its some how to complicated for me. You dont get to the site of gerson Therapy, this would be the right link : http://gerson.org/GersonTherapy/gersontherapy.htm. Would be great if someone changes it ;-).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.20.252.35 (talk) 21:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to Gerson Therapy invalid (#10) 

message: See main article, Campaign for "santorum" neologism.  It is all well and good to attempt to make a political statement by associating a person's name with aspects of a particular act, but wikipedia is a collection of fact, and not a vehicle for furtherance of a political dispute.  No recognized reference defines "santorum" as anything resembling the desired association.  Note the lack of article on "malamanteau" which was a neologism popularized by the xkcd comic, widely read among certain technogeek circles.  This place is simply not appropriate for such propaganda. Norm Reitzel (talk) 18:05, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attempt to introduce Neologism for "Santorum" 

message: The citation regarding deaths due to a coffee enema [11] is incorrect and I will update it. The article cited does not contain a reference for the claim of 3 deaths and simply states "The US FDA has warned against this regime, which is known to have caused at least three deaths".  Without a citation to the deaths the articles claims are dubious  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.171.85.59 (talk) 06:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation regarding deaths due to coffee enema  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Enema. 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/20070807002412/http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/8513/34968/358752.html?d=dmtContent to http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/8513/34968/358752.html?d=dmtContent
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) 08:10, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I happened to notice that the citation of the 1980 JAMA paper by Eisele & Reay appears twice. While that is superficially a harmless duplication, as a former maintenance guy I can testify that unnecessary duplication can be a maintenance nightmare. This article contains a huge number of references for its length, so if anyone feels like a bit of copyediting, it would be worthwhile checking for any more duplicates and redacting them to one named reference each. D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 23:49, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate references