Talk:Bronchitis

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Raja Stivy (article contribs).

Hmmm

Where does it explain what bronchitis actually is in a way that most people understand? Is it a viral/bacterial infection? Is it something else? Does the inflammation make you open to these, or is one a by-product of the rest? SOMEBODY HELP!!!!!

Also, why is most of the stuff repeated??? PLease improve the quality of this article.2.98.225.116 (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Acute Bronchitis

I am only a second year science student so I am hesitant to edit this article. However from my understanding it is a common misconception that the overuse of antibiotics causes antibiotic resistant bacteria. Think about it. If you are prescribed antibiotics for a bacterial bronchitis and you have viral bronchitis, you lack the bacterium that causes bronchitis, so it can’t mutate to become antibiotic resistant as it doesn’t exist in your system. The real cause of antibiotic resistant bacteria is when people don’t finish all of their antibiotics as prescribed. If you are prescribed 10 days worth and you stop taking them at 5 days, because you start feeling better, you still have some bacteria which caused your illness that survives. That bacteria will mutate and become antibiotic resistant. So I think this article needs to be fixed to say that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.96.66 (talk) 18:44, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

No sorry that's not true - antibiotic treatment for bronchitis would affect ALL bacteria in/on your body, not just your lungs. Some of these will be naturally resistant to the antibiotic, or partially resistant. After you have finished your course of antibiotics(even the whole course), those bacteria will have survived. Not only will they be able to recolonise your body with antibiotic resistant progeny, they are often able to pass these antibiotic resistance genes to the non-resistant strains that recolonise, which have never seen the original antibiotic (see bacterial conjugation, transduction, transformation etc).These can be different species from the original, and/or capable of causing brochitis. Bacterial bronchitis is generally from an opportunistic bacterial strain, meaning that the bacteria are present all the time, and not just in your lungs. they just wait for an in, which might be a viral infection for example. Also I should point out that antibiotics don't 'mutate' bacteria as your post seems to imply, just provide selection conditions which promote emmergance of antibiotic resistant strains. 94.193.94.71 (talk) 17:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Sudden Death?

I am jjjgoing to take off the line in the "references" portion of the article that says "It often leads to a sudden, violent death", because this doesn't seem to be a reference. csieb2011 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC).

Infectious?

I need to know if at anytime Chronic Bronchitis can become contagious. I live in a house with a 2 month old baby and he just got over RSV. At the time he contracted RSV I had Chronic Bronchitis flare-up. Could I have been the cause of it?--70.210.254.122 (talk) 21:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not a doctor. I doubt that having chronic bronchitis necessarily casts one in the role of Typhoid Mary. I gather that chronic bronchitis is more a condition than a communicable disease. The condition may make one more susceptible to contracting a disease, so (without becoming obsessive about it) one might take note of the first recommendation here (for one's own sake and that of others):

http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_section_details.asp?text_id=3338&channel_id=2026&relation_id=18291

• Wash hands

Some of the other recommendations may have varying degrees of practicality. "Avoid crowds" may be more doable — and reasonable — at some times than others. Consigning oneself to living in a bubble is almost never necessary and is not a decision to be made without a lot more counsel than one might obtain here.

Take a breath, relax, be glad that everyone is better now, talk to your doctor, communicate love (not fear) to the baby. -Ac44ck (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Infections or not?

• Looking through other sources (NIH) it seems that acute bronchitis caused by a virus or bacteria could be infectious, being spread through mucus particles. The claim that bronchitis is not infectious that is made in the main article appears incorrect. Is there a citation for that claim? -V madhu (talk) 16:51, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

My 16 month old son who recently started going to child care came down with Bronchialitis (as diagnosed by an experienced doctor). Then I got it a week later (after having a mild flu).

I think the viral and bacterial Bronchitis is contagious. I feel like a living test subject! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.168.112.41 (talk) 05:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Chronic Bronchitis

The article listed two conflicting definitions of chronic bronchitis (symptoms over 2 vs 3 years). I've reconciled the two definitions to point to '2 years', in accordance to a report I found and referenced at the CDC. That report though referenced other documents as part of its definition, so perhaps the original source would be a better reference? - William McVey, Oct 21, 2009

"is characterized by the presence of the grim reaper seriously??? Was This added as a joke-- someone fix please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.207.54.89 (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Copyright Violation

I have removed portions of this article which seem to have been copied from Kidshealth.org.

Shijaz (talk) 07:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Main Picture

In an effort to improve the quality of this article, I think we would find it beneficial to add a main picture to the article. Perhaps we could add a diagram of how Bronchitis affects the lungs. Please feel free to express your thoughts. If you think I should find a picture and upload it, I would be more than happy to do so. Tyrol5 [Talk] 17:44, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to edit

It is proposed that Bronchitis be part of the trial of a new template; see the green strip at the top of Pain where it has been in place for a couple of months. The purpose of this project is to encourage readers to edit, while equipping them with the basic tools. If you perceive a problem with this, or have any suggestions for improvement, please discuss at the project talk page --Anthonyhcole (talk) 09:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC).

Um, why did my new section disappear without any record of edits in the history? 67.204.1.21 (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Treatment with antibiotics revisited

A doctor I saw after seven full days of being sick diagnosed bronchitis and ordered a chest x-ray. I was given clarithromycin 500 mg 2x/day for "underlying illness." I'm also using antibacterial lozenges and mouthwash because my most severe symptom is sore throat, at times reaching about 6 out of 10 on the pain scale. So it seems that the prohibition on prescribing antibiotics and antibacterials for bronchitis is not universal, and perhaps the article should reflect that. 66.49.178.132 (talk) 19:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

source for history section?

[1] not great quality source, but often you have to compromise for the history section. lesion (talk) 06:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree, not the best resource and I might use it if my other leads don't come through. I found a review paper solely about it and I've asked a user to see if she has access. If not, I'm going to try again at the resource exchange and if not, then I'll have to explore other avenues to find a source. I appreciate you finding that though. If you find anything else, don't hesitate to let me know. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 06:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Too complex

(moved from article.) This whole damn article is too complex some people can't understand these terms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.212.96 (talk • contribs) 02:11, 29 January 2013

It will be more helpful if you can give specific examples of sentences that are too complex so we can work on making them more accessible.TylerDurden8823 (talk) 19:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

external links

I added some external links to medlineplus & the mayo clinic, which should help people looking for a non-technical treatment summary. This is one of the most highly-trafficked medical articles on Wikipedia, per WP:5000 -- phoebe / (talk to me) 18:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Acute versus chronic bronchitis

These are two completely different conditions. It does not make sense to discuss them together. Propose we cut this article short and just provide a brief overview of the two in separate section and than provide links to the main articles. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, doesn't that basically cut to the point of why have a bronchitis article? I admit that I kind of wondered about that too. I felt an acute bronchitis and chronic bronchitis page would be sufficient but this page was already here so I just went to work on it. The way it looks now though, is it following the MOS of diseases?TylerDurden8823 (talk) 00:35, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I think this should be basically a form of disambig page. It is not about one disease but two very different disease. The only think acute bronchitis and chronic bronchitis really share is the word bronchitis and that confuses the issue.

So I would propose a couple of paragraphs that give an overview and than direct people who want to know about each type to a main article on it. Else we create co tracts which make our work more difficult. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Non-infectious causes

Infections or lung irritants cause acute bronchitis (http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/brnchi/causes.html). However I am having a hard time to find some literature on this? Richiez (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Epidemiology

"In 2013, it resulted in 2.9 million deaths, up from 2.4 million deaths in 1990" This makes it sound as if it has become more widespread, while in reality world population grew much more than that in the same period. Ibmua (talk) 13:11, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Adjusted. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:13, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

CT for diagnosis of acute bronchitis

Bronchial wall thickness (T) and diameter (D).

"Bronchial wall thickening, as can be seen on CT scan, generally (but not always) impies inflammation of the bronchi. Normally, the ratio of the bronchial wall thickness and the bronchial diameter is between 0.17 and 0.23."

This is not used in diagnosis? Last think we want to imply is that those with bronchitis should request a CT. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:16, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Text

Not sure what is wrong with "Most people with chronic bronchitis have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)."?

Not all of them do by the way, just most of them. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:20, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

What i see to be wrong with the sentence is that COPD includes most cases of chronic bronchitis and emphysema - these two conditions are separate and distinct conditions. Either one of which can be a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The sentence as reads (to me) is treating COPD as a separate disease instead of a covering term. Since either or both chronic bronchitis and emphysema may or may not (on occasion) be severe enough to be classed as a COPD, they mostly are. Possibly it's like saying most people with Alzheimer's have Dementia. A better reading might be - Most cases of chronic bronchitis are classed as a COPD. ?--Iztwoz (talk) 11:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

This "Either one of which can be a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." is not really true. What is "severe" chronic bronchitis?

Chronic bronchitis is technically a productive cough that lasts for three months or more per year for at least two years. It is nothing more and nothing less. It is not classified as mild, moderate, or severe.

The problem comes that in common usage people use the term chronic bronchitis anonymously with COPD.

Chronic bronchitis is a symptom it is not a distinct medical condition.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:17, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

So as an analogy:

Lets say cough = chronic bronchitis

And the common cold = COPD

One can correctly say that "Most people with a cough have the common cold"

One does NOT say "when cough is severe enough it is called a common cold"

But you already agreed that not all cases of chronic bronchitis are considered a COPD. It is considered to be when it is severe enough according to defined spirometry etc parameters.--Iztwoz (talk) 09:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:20, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Emphysemia is a pathological description of tissue changes. It is like saying "dysplasia".

Emphysemia is something that is commonly seen on examination of the lungs of people with COPD under a microscope.

People also commonly and incorrectly use the term as a synonym of COPD.

So even though dysplasia is seen in cancer one does not technically call the disease cancer dysplasia. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:23, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

So basically when a pathologist sees emphysema in the lungs then will say the exam is consistent with COPD.

When someone has a chronic productive cough for more than three months in each of two year one can say the person's symptoms are consistent with COPD. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

[2] - In answer to the above the website under the section COPD refers to both chronic bronchitis and emphysema as diseases (as do many other sources).--Iztwoz (talk) 09:05, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes the term is used in two different ways. Thus why we now have a disambig at chronic bronchitis Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:03, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

User:Iztwoz what text in the reference Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine supported your word change? I assume you pulled the textbook and read that section? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:27, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

i do not know which change you are referring to it seems like i may have changed a word for clarity not for change of meaning - i do not have a copy of this book.--Iztwoz (talk) 09:05, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

The text you continue to change is this "Most people with chronic bronchitis have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)." It is completely correct the way it is so I have restored.

When one is changing the wording of text one should generally read the associated source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:03, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

NHLBI text

Lets go through the NIH source you have used to try to say "Chronic bronchitis is a type of COPD". The source says[3]:

"Chronic bronchitis is an ongoing cough that lasts for several months and comes back two or more years in a row."

"Chronic bronchitis is often part of a serious condition called chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)."

Yes both of these statements are correct and consistent with the rest of the literature and neither one says it is a type of COPD. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

We need a newer source than 2006

For "Chronic bronchitis is a component of COPD."Petty, TL (2006). "The history of COPD". International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 1 (1): 3–14. PMID 18046898."

It would support that it was a component but we already say that.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:15, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Chronic bronchitis as a subcategory of COPD

This is no longer true. MESH is from 2002.

https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/record/ui?ui=D029481

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:22, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Re the above note - MeSH ref is of 2019 - the term was changed in 2002 and has not been changed since - presumably because it still stands as a respiratory disease. The fact that GOLD does not use it in its definition is because not all people with chronic bronchitis also have COPD - and they still refer to it being a separate disease entity (GOLD2019) so i cannot understand your understanding of this. I have made another edit which to my mind is comprehensive. One of your edits (reverts) said that this was no longer true - the Dorland's ref is from 2012 - the GOLD report is unchanged in this aspect since well before this time. i say again that the GOLD report of 2019 says that chronic bronchitis needs to be treated as a separate entity. As previously stated all other refs to COPD include it but also many state that its inclusion is usually marked by an accompanying level of emphysema. If it is not a type of COPD then it is a type of respiratory disease. If it is a type of COPD it is a type of obstructive respiratory disease. As you would have it, somebody being diagnosed with chronic bronchitis or their friend or relative, would look it up on Wikipedia and be redirected to the page COPD - but this was not the diagnosis and yet it would then be mistakenly assumed that the person had COPD. surely this is wrong. surely? --Iztwoz (talk) 06:16, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

The primary technical meaning of the term is that it is a "chronic productive cough" so the section should begin with that. Chronic bronchitis already links to COPD.

If someone is told they have "chronic bronchitis" typically it means they have COPD and someone is simple using the old terminology.

Someone is simply using the old terminology!? Is this someone the person responsible for making 8.6 million diagnoses of Chronic bronchitis in 2016 in America?--Iztwoz (talk) 10:15, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Combining the two is WP:SYNTH. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Dorlands is also from 2011 Dorland's illustrated medical dictionary (32nd ed.). Saunders/Elsevier. 2012. p. 252. ISBN 9781416062578.

So also a little old. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:09, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

That is so wrong. Chronic bronchitis already links to that beause you made the redirect. which is a bit off since it is a type of bronchitis and therefore better covered on Bronchitis page.

To say that someone with chronic bronchitis means they have COPD is absolutely wrong. Not all cases of chronic bronchitis are considered as a COPD as they do not meet the spirometry values needed for COPD diagnosis. This is clearly even stated in your bible GOLD. The spirometry criterion for COPD is usually met when somebody with chronic bronchitis has also developed some degree of emphysema. Likewise not everybody with emphysema has COPD - again readily referenced and clearly understandable.

As for the rearranging of sentences - the 'disease' is marked by mucus hypersecretion which is the cause of the cough.

It seems that you have a problem with the use of the word 'disease' - Dorland's definition is of any deviation from the normal structure or function which would apply to both chronic bronchitis and emphysema.--Iztwoz (talk) 07:28, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

The term is used in different ways. It was used to mean COPD per the WHO source. And it is also used for a chronic productive cough. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:55, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

The comments above were added before reading your later edits. it seems that you have allowed the use of the word disease and the ref - so if that's a stable edit - thank you.

I would still take issue with the inclusion of the sentence: - Previously the term "chronic bronchitis" was also used for a type of COPD. What does the sentence mean?--Iztwoz (talk) 07:38, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

I will pull the latest edition of Harrison's tomorrow and see what it says.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:52, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Harrison's 20e, Chapter 286: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

"COPD includes emphysema, an anatomically defined condition characterized by destruction of the lung alveoli with air space enlargement; chronic bronchitis, a clinically defined condition with chronic cough and phlegm; and small airway disease, a condition in which small bronchioles are narrowed and reduced in number"

This indicates that emphysema and chronic bronchitis are typically within COPD. Emphysema is defined pathologically and that chronic bronchitis is simple a chronic cough with phlegm. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

"Emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and small airway disease are present in varying degrees in different COPD patients. Patients with a history of cigarette smoking without chronic airflow obstruction may have chronic bronchitis, emphysema, and dyspnea. Although these patients are not included within the classic definition of COPD, they may have similar disease processes... Although traditional teaching is that patients with predominant emphysema, termed “pink puffers,” are thin and noncyanotic at rest and have prominent use of accessory muscles, and patients with chronic bronchitis are more likely to be heavy and cyanotic (“blue bloaters”), current evidence demonstrates that most patients have elements of both chronic bronchitis and emphysema and that the physical examination does not reliably differentiate the two entities."

These processes are not one or the other but a mixture and thus are not types of COPD. Used to be viewed as type of COPD. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

"Cigarette smoking often results in mucus gland enlargement and goblet cell hyperplasia, leading to cough and mucus production that define chronic bronchitis, but these abnormalities are not related to airflow limitation."

This emphases that chronic bronchitis is simple defined by a cough and mucus production. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

but it does not deny the existence of chronic bronchitis as a disease--Iztwoz (talk) 07:13, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

What is the definition of a clinically defined condition? and an anatomically defined condition? the inclusion of small airways disease is also included as a condition since that is the full name of the condition....are you saying that these terms do not also equate with 'disease' ? (It is clear what the reference means by clinically and anatomically defined)

Both of these terms fit the normally acceptable use of disease. These 'conditions' in normally accepted terms are as 'disease' - which brings us right around to the beginning of these exchanges that emphysema and chronic bronchitis are diseases (even described as conditions) in their own right. and ought not to redirect to COPD.

Does Harrisons's have an entry for either chronic bronchitis or emphysema? --Iztwoz (talk) 07:13, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

There is no entry or chapter specifically on "chronic bronchitis" or "emphysema". These are not seen as separate disease but most modern sources.

This is why the CDC source says "Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Includes: Chronic Bronchitis and Emphysema"[4]

A "clinically defined condition" is a condition that diagnosed based on the presence of specific symptoms (rather than blood tests, medical imaging, a structure interview etc)

Are they a separate disease? No, they are generally components of a disease known as COPD. They should be redirected to COPD as the CDC and Harrisons does. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:51, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

User:Doc James Firstly the CDC states that COPD refers to a group of diseases..(see below). You say (again) that these are not separate diseases yet either can exist and not be a COPD. The fact that over 8 million Americans were diagnosed with chronic bronchitis must mean that it is very clearly treated as a separate disease. They were not all diagnosed with COPD. The same for emphysema - they are only included in COPD when there is definable airflow limitation. So when they are not included logic must dictate that they exist in their own right.

Also since GOLD does not emphasise bronchitis or emphysema in their definition - they only refer to restricted airflow why do you feel there is this need to redirect these conditions to COPD. Even GOLD states that chronic bronchitis needs to be treated as a separate disease. These were unhelpful and imo unnecessary redirects. Emphysema gets millions of hits on google and since your redirect of this to COPD a link comes up to emphysema on Simple English Wikipedia - or have you simply overlooked redirecting this also. best --Iztwoz (talk) 07:19, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

CDC also states (if you click on their link on the page you give, in Related links)[5] - "Chronic obstructive disease (COPD) refers to a group of diseases that cause airflow blockage and breathing-related problems. It includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis". It need not be so necessary to point out that these are included diseases - it says nowhere, anywhere, that these diseases do not exist outside of the definition of COPD. They exist as distinct listed diseases. How can it be said that in 2016 over 8 million Americans were diagnosed with chronic bronchitis, and at the same time that they were diagnosed with COPD. It is a fact that not every case of chronic bronchitis is also a COPD and not every case of emphysema is a COPD. These are both listed in the ICD and MeSH as diseases - are you saying that they are wrong.? --Iztwoz (talk) 22:31, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

These two terms have two different meanings so therefore it is confusing. Emphysema is a pathological condition. Chronic bronchitis is a clinical condition yes. The terms used to be used to refer to types of COPD. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:23, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Sources

Doc James (talk · contribs) Have found one source (MSD) that makes things very clear - it describes chronic bronchitis with restricted airflow as chronic obstructive bronchitis and it is this type that is classed as a COPD. Otherwise chronic bronchitis is left as it is. Since it is clear and well sourced i shall add it. It's the same meaning as the ICD listing of emphysematous bronchitis. Could you voice any objections here please. --Iztwoz (talk) 21:15, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

User:Iztwoz what is MSD? Other sources are also clear that it is no longer classified as a type of COPD.

The Merck Manuals are published by Merck, Sharp, and Dohme and are known as the MSD manuals outside of the US and Canada. This was the source already in use.

It would be extremely helpful if the sources allowed were consistent - an edit you reverted was because the source given - the ALA, was a charity. Yet it is used on this page and is also the first reference used in the GOLD report.

You did not respond to the earlier note that the CDC uses the terms diseases - you used a CDC ref. to support your earlier stance - yet the same source as given and used in an earlier edit was vetoed.

Is Medscape an allowed source? --Iztwoz (talk) 06:53, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

GOLD is clear and is a better source.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:08, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Adjusted a bit. GOLD is a significantly better source than MSD. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:19, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

ICD11

I do not understand were this text comes from "The ICD-11 lists chronic bronchitis with emphysema as "emphysematous bronchitis" which it lists as a "certain specified COPD"." Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:52, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

It is on the page given, in the drop down list from emphysema search, under CA22.1 is emphysematous bronchitis which i can only assume is its description. i have also come across this mix elsewhere.--Iztwoz (talk) 18:31, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Ah okay just shows up when you search for emphysema. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Edit attention

just to note that edits changed in Treatment section need re-doing. (Info does not now match refs)--Iztwoz (talk) 15:14, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Adjusted some. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:49, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

History of the terms

https://books.google.bg/books?id=enY4yvTkS9oC&pg=PA34

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:44, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Well no longer used, innit?

I don’t understand why you adjusted a good edit , in my view well explained and completely supported by the refs , with the introduction of some sort of urban slang? If this is the intent I suggest it’s culture specific as the British version would need the ‘’innit’’ tag. "Well no longer used, innit?" Also, your edit introduced the use of "distinct types" which none of the references refer to. Each one was used as a label for COPD.-- Iztwoz (talk) 06:03, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Not sure why you removed "Previously the term "chronic bronchitis" was also used for a type of COPD" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:30, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

I had removed this as no reference supports this usage. I have just removed the older WHO ref placed alongside the newer ref which modified the wording - so why include it? As previously written on COPD page how can it be said that they (including emphysema) were previously called types of COPD – they are types of COPD currently defined in every website posted. They were names used for COPD which is completely different to saying that they were different entities as writ on COPD page. Previously chronic bronchitis and emphysema were called COPD which is very different from calling them types of COPD. Today's usage universally describes them as types of COPD. So however you have decided to interpret things in this way is not at all helpful to any reader - in fact it is very confusing if not meaningless. Is there a reason for even including the sentence.?Iztwoz (talk) 12:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Ref says "The more familiar terms 'chronic bronchitis' and 'emphysema' are no longer used, but are now included within the COPD diagnosis."[6]

Other ref says "The more familiar terms “chronic bronchitis” and “emphysema” have often been used as labels for the condition."[7]

Both of them are current.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:20, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

But neither says they were types of COPD - they were "used as labels" or the "terms are no longer used".   

The following quotes are from current usage:

“Chronic bronchitis and emphysema are common types of COPD”  [8]  

“COPD is an umbrella term used to describe progresssive lung diseases including emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and refractory asthma” [9]

“COPD is a group of lung conditions including bronchitis and emphysema”  [10]

“Chronic bronchitis is one type of COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease).” [11]

You are stating that previously chronic bronchitis was used for a type of COPD — which must mean that now it is either used for something else, or is not a type of COPD — yet all current definitions call it a type of COPD even if that is modified by airflow limitation.

And to call it a "term" on the page that is its subject is plainly wrong.--Iztwoz (talk) 12:02, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Or - before the introduction of COPD as an umbrella term for chronic bronchitis and emphysema both were treated as chronic and obstructive lung diseases - hence "the terms are no longer used" instead COPD is. They were not types of COPD previously - they became types of COPD when the umbrella term was introduced.--Iztwoz (talk) 13:26, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for removing the reference to types. --Iztwoz (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for comments

For any interested editor - on the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease talk page there is a request for comments relating to the redirect of Chronic bronchitis.--Iztwoz (talk) 14:36, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Hypersecretion

Have reinstated the word hypersecretion - this is a simple enough word! and mucus hypersecretion is the term choice of almost all studies evidenced by citations. To use overproduction is to diminish and obscure the meaning of hypersecretion - mucus is overproduced in colds and flu and is clearly different from the hypersecretion of chronic bronchitis - it is the hypersecretion that is responsible for the chronic productive cough. Also removed ref to Chinese consensus - this is the general view held shall add GOLD ref. --Iztwoz (talk) 07:23, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Text

This is a Chinese consensus and we need to state that.

Thus "COPD includes chronic bronchitis as a phenotype, includes an emphysematous phenotype, and also a third phenotype of frequent exacerbations is recognised." is not appropriate.

Also were does the source mention "emphysematous phenotype" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5796802/

When you use GOLD instead (which you should) than one can remove the Chinese bit. Excessive mucus secretion is fine. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:14, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

How is 'excessive mucus production' an improvement on 'mucus hypersecretion'?--Iztwoz (talk) 08:31, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

It clearly describes what is being discussed. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:48, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

How on earth do you cope with words like 'hypertension', 'hyperthyroid', 'hyperventilate', 'hyperactive'.........? --Iztwoz (talk) 15:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Polish Article

The polish article is written and not connected: https://pl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostre_zapalenie_oskrzelik%C3%B3w ShalokShalom (talk) 13:26, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

ShalokShalom, I am not sure how Zapalenie oskrzeli gets linked to Bronchitis. I went to the "edit languages" link, but by clicking edit I could only edit badges! It may be an automated process which is not working right. Suggest you ask at the WP:Help desk.--Quisqualis (talk) 18:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

ShalokShalom, Bronchiolitis is the English article you want. It has a Polish version in the languages list.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:40, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

It has no polish version in my language list ShalokShalom (talk)