Talk:Hypoxia (medicine)

message: I was surprised to see that these two pages are separate - it seems to me that they describe essentially the same condition, just in different organisms.  I reckon it'd make sense for them to be merged.
:—Preceding unsigned comment added by Napalm Llama (talk • contribs)  22:27, 14 June 2006
*Strong Disagree - oxygen depletion, as it is currently written, is mostly to do with reduced oxygenation of waterways/supplies and whilst an important topic, is nonetheless quite separate from [[Hypoxia {medical]]. That said, I think Oxygen depletion is a little unclear as a title and perhaps a rename is appropriate, e.g. to Waterway oxygen depletion or Oxygen depletion of waterways. David Ruben  Talk  22:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested merger with [[Hypoxia (environmental)|Oxygen depletion]] 

message: THIS MERGE HAS NOW BEEN DONE
What's the difference between this and Hypoxia (medical)? User:Jmeppley 03:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: pO2 of <10 is regarded as hypoxia on room air. But why are you asking? JFW | T@lk 20:34, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

text: The terms are synonymous in most concepts. The extreme nitpickers among us would distinguish the two as follows: Hypoxia is a general deficiency of oxygen in the body. Hypoxemia is a deficiency of oxygen in the blood. You dont get one without the other and in clinical care people use the term hypoxia to mean both. So the articles should be merged with a one sentence explanation of the difference. alteripse 13:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've put a request for merge tag.  Andrew73 14:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I say someone is hypoxic when technically they are hypoxaemic. Can we have a page entitled "Hypoxia and Hypoxaemia" which clearly explains the differences and common points (and explains the slack jargon) and then points to the relevant detailed syndromes? Or perhaps Hypoxia, with sections on generalised hypoxia (AKA hypoxaemia) and regionalhypoxia. Hmm. I seem to have argued myself into agreeing with the merge idea. Jellytussle 05:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Standard existing shunts include the thebesian vessels which empty into the left ventricle and the bronchial circulation which supply the bronchi with oxygen. 
I left the physiology bits right at the bottom of the article as more specific than most readers might need, and the causes/classification system is very much an introduction to other more specialised articles here in wikipedia. David Ruben  Talk  14:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion merge [[Hypoxaemia]] with this page

message: As someone who was looking for clarification of the term in a botanical sense, there are some interesting comments as to whether the different versions of Anoxia should be merged or not. Why can't the terms be used as Anoxia (Botanical) and Anoxia (Medical)?
: my vote would be to merge, hypoxia (environmental), Hypoxic zone, Anoxic sea water and Oxygen minimum zone under hypoxia (environmental) and reirect from these terms and anoxia (environmental).  I don't see it as hard but I can't see myself with time just now. Ex nihil 03:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep 'Hypoxia (medical)' rather than 'Anoxia (medical)'. Reduced oxygenation is far commoner (and involving more medical attention, investigation and treatment) than total absence (COPD reduces oxygen through lungs into blood whilat a total absence of oxygen entering the blood stream = death, ect per specific localised body tissue). In medical usage (thats use by doctors and how it actually relates to patients), hypoxia is the term most used rather than anoxia. David Ruben  Talk  15:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anoxia / Hypoxia 

message: I've just added these two closely related/overlapping disorders to the shortlist of causes of hypoxia. I was surprised they weren't already on the list, given how common they are (and surely are a major cause of hypoxia). I had a quick look at the history entries -- didn't spot any reference to either term, but that's not conclusive. So I'm wondering, does anybody know if one or both was/were previously mentioned but removed from the article? In any event, I can see from the history & talk pages that a lot of work has gone into this relatively short article -- my thanks to everybody who's had a hand in it. Cgingold 15:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sleep apnea and Hypopnea  

message: One of the cited causes of hypoxic hypoxia is described here as "low partial pressur of atmospheric oxygen". This is very vague: I think it would be useful to say at what typical partial pressure values hypoxia begins to set in, and how the partial pressure influences the rate of onset; also the partial pressure values over which normal lung function takes place, and the typical partial pressure of atmospheric oxygen, eg in dry air at sea level. Can anyone add this data? Mooncow 00:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hypoxic hypoxia 

message: .  I just don't have time to upload it right now.  If you'd like to upload it but don't know how, I'm glad to help, just drop me a note on my talk page. delldot ∇. 06:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free image available 

message: I just ran across a casual mention of this: "...will pregnant exposed workers demand powered air purifying respirators given the data suggesting fetal hypoxia associated with filtering facepieces?"  I haven't heard of this before, but it certainly makes sense.  I've requested literature citations and will try to get back to this, but anybody feel free to run with it.  64.161.0.134 (talk) 16:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fetal hypoxia caused by mother wearing filter-type respirator 

message: Why are the items in the lists "lightheadedness / fatigue, numbness / tingling of extremities, nausea, and anoxia." and "ataxia, confusion / disorientation / hallucinations / behavioral change, severe headaches / reduced level of consciousness, papilloedema, breathlessness,[5] pallor,[7] tachycardia, and pulmonary hypertension" sometimes separated by commas and sometimes by oblique strokes? 86.132.223.30 (talk) 15:05, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly because they were written by someone in a hurry. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 13:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style question 

message: NEJM doi:10.1056/NEJMra1612008 JFW | T@lk 19:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you be a little more specific? This criticism is not very actionable. Remember that this encyclopedia is written by volunteers. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 13:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effects of chronic hypoxia 

message: Some researchers have suggested the use of microsaccades as a detection and study method for hypoxia. I think this would be meaningful to include, though it is not clear to me where it would fit in the existing article structure. ParticipantObserver (talk) 07:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a look at the reference and do not see it as sufficient to add anything to this article. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 11:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microsaccades 

message: I notice carbon monoxyde was cited as an example of hypoxemic hypoxia, I think it should be cited as an example of anemic hypoxia. Low hemoglobin and dyshemoglobinemia and all hemoglobine disorders (methemoglobine, etc.) should fit in this category. Note that in carbon monoxyde poisoning the PaO2 is normal and skin color of the victim normal also.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.82.54.113 (talk) 13:14, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Reliable sources do not seem to concur. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:59, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hypoxemic hypoxia vs anemic hypoxia 

message: Is anyone going to object to taking the reference definitions out of the text and listing them in the references section? This allows them to be listed alphabetically, which is a big advantage for reuse and fixing formatting, and makes the wikitext far more readable. Please provide logical rationale for your objections. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 13:34, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference list 

message: The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as  is optional.Mostly good. A few exceptions, but generally acceptable. 
The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for , although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.Ther is much more that could be added, as the topic is large, but good enough for B at this stage I think. 
The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.Structure is good and appears to comply with WP:MEDMOS for medical conditions. 
The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously. Looks OK to me. 
The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. There are some appropriate images. Looks OK. 
 Most technical terms are linked or explained in the text. If I have missed anything important, fix it or let me know. 
Good enough. Promoting to B-class. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 08:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-class review 

message: Suggestions for improvements are invited. Do them yourself or leave a note, preferably with a relevant ref or two. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 08:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What next?