Talk:Suppository: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:00, 4 January 2008

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Suppository article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

'where it melts'

I don't think the word 'melts' is what should be used here -- but which word would be better? -Shai-kun 05:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dissolves?

I think dissolve is better. More encyclopedic.

drugs?

there's no mention of hallucinogenic or opioid drugs being used suppository

and that's a shame.

AC 01:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Popular Culture?

Would a "Suppositories in Popular Culture" section be appropriate or would it be inviting too much trouble? It seems like it should be a part due to the amount of jokes about them but I'm afraid to add it in.

I support this notion. As a contribution, in the episode The Deep South of Futurama, suppositories are a running joke. --Muna (talk) 16:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commonly used for

Is there a difference between the two last points on the list?

BTW what is meant by commonly? In these parts suppositories are never (AFAIK) used for anything systemic. The very idea that you could take e.g. a painkiller through your rectum seems ridiculous. I have heard (but have no reference) that they are common in Catholic countries and just about unknown in Protestant countries.

Klausok 08:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(1) "Taking a painkiller through your rectum seems ridiculous"; maybe to you, but it certainly avoids the bleeding stomach that comes with the ingestion of aspirin.

(2) "I have heard… that [suppositories] are common in Catholic countries and just about unknown in Protestant countries". Really? When have France, China, Egypt, India, Turkey, and Greece been Roman Catholic countries?

(3) Perhaps, if you read "Payer, L., "How Medical Practice Reflects National Culture", The Sciences, Vol.30, No.4, (July-August 1990), pp.38-42." you may get a better notion of the extent to which the delivery of medicine is culture bound.

(4) There are no known religious grounds for either the usage or non-usage of suppositories, in any of the world's major religions. 149.171.241.152 (talk) 07:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 [[User:Klausok|Klausok]] 08:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
+:(1) "Taking a painkiller through your rectum seems ridiculous"; maybe to you, but it certainly avoids the bleeding stomach that comes with the ingestion of aspirin.
+:(2) "I have heard… that [suppositories] are common in Catholic countries and just about unknown in Protestant countries". Really? When have France, China, Egypt, India, Turkey, and Greece been Roman Catholic countries?
+:(3) Perhaps, if you read "Payer, L., "How Medical Practice Reflects National Culture", The Sciences, Vol.30, No.4, (July-August 1990), pp.38-42." you may get a better notion of the extent to which the delivery of medicine is culture bound.
+:(4) There are no known religious grounds for either the usage or non-usage of suppositories, in any of the world's major religions. [[Special:Contributions/149.171.241.152|149.171.241.152]] ([[User talk:149.171.241.152|talk]]) 07:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)