Talk:Asthma

Editing Request

The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) recommends that asthma treatment incorporates various methods, such as asthma monitoring, patient and family education, the removal of environmental triggers, and/or the use of long-term and quick-relief medication.

References

Help me edit the introductory section to Asthma

This statement appears in the top section of the Asthma page:

"There is no known cure for asthma, but it is easily treatable.[3]"

I could not find a way to edit it myself, hence I am requesting you to consider an edit I cannot make. The phrase - "easily treatable" - is technically correct but misleading. It is true that asthma is treatable, and most of the treatments are "easy" unless one acknowledges that many people have trouble with inhaler technique. However, the statement implies that asthma treatment is also universally effective and this is far from the case. Later in the page I added information to illustrate this.

It turns out there is evidence for a known cure for some forms of asthma, which I will address on the 'Chlamydia pneumoniae' page. However, this topic is still very controversial so I am not dealing with it directly on the asthma page, except to explain why I suggest altering the statement to read:

"The current consensus is that there is no known cure for asthma, and many efficacious treatments are available that have variable effectiveness."

Disparities

The Guardian recently published an article about gender disparities in asthma attacks and deaths in the UK. There are also significant differences in childhood asthma rates in, for example, New York due to segregated neighborhoods disproportionately affected by pollution. I think this is a pertinent topic to add to the page and was wondering if anyone has a suggestion for what information to include, where to put it (Type 2 Diabetes has an 'epidemiology' section), etc. If there are no comments on this I will probably put it towards the bottom of the article and include pertinent links to other disparities in medicine/medical research. Thanks! Kazamzam (talk) 04:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

well-controlled

What exactly is meant by well-controlled asthma? Does it mean that one has no more symptoms at all, or does it mean that the symptoms are still present but only very weak? And if the latter is the case, how weak do the symptoms have to be in order to be considered well controlled? Mr.Lovecraft (talk) 14:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

It is through a questionnaire filled in by the patient. GINA has one and there is also the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ).

For asthma to be "well-controlled" for GINA it means no symptoms in the last 4 weeks, for ACQ it's a little more complex but generally weak or none.

Check the ACQ for an in-depth view of how weak the symptoms must be. 2A02:1810:C20:8000:C079:9A02:8955:6B6 (talk) 12:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

References

Why are all the references in the notes section and not the references section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.242.28.15 (talk) 20:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2023

Under "Associated Conditions" subheading, remove line that says "It is not known whether asthma causes psychological problems or psychological problems lead to asthma.". This line borders on implying causation from a correlation that was found, while not adding anything to the subheading. The correlation is worth stating, but it is just a correlation. I just feel it isn't necessary to even writing the words "asthma causes psychological problems" and "psychology problems lead to asthma" without any sort of proposed causal mechanism with any traction. Thestonkinator (talk) 05:22, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -Lemonaka‎ 23:44, 5 June 2023 (UTC)