Talk:Flatulence
|
|
Dear Administrator I added something I think could be useful, I regret if you don't know who Dante is and what he did for Italian language, I think you should think more about it! manu thanks --Chicco 16:50, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
I hate to say it, but the reference website given on the flatulence page denotes that the main gas in a fart is indeed nitrogen, even noting that 2/3rds of people dont emit any methane from a fart.
From the site:
"According to Dr. James L. A. Roth, the author of Gastrointestinal Gas (Ch. 17 in Gastroenterology, v. 4, 1976) most people (2/3 of adults) pass farts that contain no methane. If both parents are methane producers, their children have a 95% chance of being producers as well. The reason for this is apparently unknown. Some researchers suspect a genetic influence, whereas others think the ability is due to environmental factors. However, all methane in any farts comes from bacterial action and not from human cells.
so clearly the select few who can pass gas and light it on fire (I have only met a few who can do this, not all can) clearly are in the minority. For this reason I see to it that the composition part of the article should be changed.
Don't forget the hydrogen though, that's flammable.
Cabbage, too, right? ;-) --LMS
Would like to know what kinds of gases are emitted. Is it really methane, or is that a myth? --RjLesch
- A simple experiment with baked beans and a match should convince you that it's methane :) --Robert Merkel
- The explosive component may be methane, but the offensive part for most carivores and omnivores's output spells like Hydrogen Sulphide, H2S.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=flatulence
It's so sad that Wikipedia's article isn't on the first few pages of the "flatulence" search results! :-) --LMS
Flatulence has SFA (Sweet Fuck-All, do we need that too?) to do with the nature, chemical composition, or sniffability of gasses released.
I humbly suggest:
Gas released from the latter end of a consumptive's alimentary canal.
- Putting on my (dusty) medical doctor's cap - I disagree. The gas released is of significance, it says a lot about the diet of the animal involved and in humans can be a diagnostic aspect in certain gastro-intestinal disorders. Plus the gas involved is a direct consequence of the microbiology of the GIT, so it relates to bacteriology. We had an entire lecture on it during second year physiology (!) (If I could remember anything I'd write the article myself) - MMGB
- I just wish I could track down the New Scientist news article from 25 or more years ago where someone's excessive flatulence problem was solved when they analysed the gases. It was mostly CO2, from which, by a chain of reasoning I don't recall, they concluded he should cut down on dairy products. The report said it worked...
- Plus of course "consumptive" means "infected with tuberculosis". --Paul Drye
- My handy dandy dictionary would say that you're being too exclusive: consumptive - tending to consume, destructive, wasteful. Just for fun, btw, consumptive in your sense specifically means tuberculosis that affects the lungs. --Colin dellow
Not all cultures consider flatulence an embarassing or guiltily amusing subject: people from the Punjab, in my experience, consider flatulence no more amusing or embarassing than sneezing. This may well be true of other cultures: are there any other world-wide Wikipedians with examples of cultures that smiply do not give a toss about flatulence?
"As methane is flammable, some flatulence is as well" Should we add a warning ? DON'T TRY IT
"The gases are most often caused by swallowing air" - Is this bit true? If so, then methane would not be expected as "the primary gas released". There is little methane in ordinary air. -- Oliver P. 04:41 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)
- Answer: Reboot has stated in a recent edit summary, "flatulence isn't cause by swallowing air. You can cause a ructation that way but not flatulence." Thank you for clarifying that. :) -- Oliver P. 21:48 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)
Reboot I have conducted extensive research into this subject.
Also, not only does tight clothing cause a gassy stomach to be painful, it also can contribute to the production of gas. I wonder whether this can be substantiated in any way? It looks rather dubious to me. Nafnaf 11:11 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Bovine flatulence is a source of greenhouse gas and may contribute to the greenhouse effect.
Is this for real? It's going to be part of the cycles of nature, ie the carbon cycle, isn't it? The difference between cows and cars, say, is that the latter "eat" fossil fuels which, until recently, were locked away underground where they couldn't affect anything... Evercat 04:20, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, not only is it really true, but it is also heavily significant. I can envision not including cow-farts in the article on the basis that this is about people-farts, but that is just about it. If the article is about flatulence in general, rather than flatulence in humans, the article is much too humanoflatulency-centric as it is, and probably could benefit from a wider treatment of flatulence in lower animals in general. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 07:58, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
- Indeed! Refer to the New Zealand Government's so-called Fart Tax: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3529313&thesection=news&thesubsection=general&thesecondsubsection=&reportid=57030
Can anybody shed a light about the relation between vegetarianism and flatulence? Guaka 22:26, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
There is an inconsistency between the statement in the "Causes" section that 90% of flatulence is from exogenous sources (i.e. air) and the statement in the "Composition" section that methane is the primary gas released. Air is about 80% nitrogen, and nitrogen is inert. So if a fart is 90% air, then the fart would be about 70% nitrogen (i.e. nitrogen would be the primary gas, not methane). Does anyone have data to reconcile this contradiction?
i have added what i thought was NECESSARY to the information on flatulence. the ofthen humerous expulsion of gas through one's rectum.
| Contents |
Exact mechanism by which beans cause flatulence
- In beans, the most notorious offenders in this regard, the problem seems to arise from starch molecules resistant to digestion: when the polysaccharides reach the intestines, intestinal bacteria feed on them, producing gas.
My source (McGee, 1984; see article) suggests that the precise mechanism in this instance is indigestible oligosaccharides (a type of polysaccharide) reaching the lower intestine and being metabolised by bacteria, producing CO2 etc; and that oligosaccharides are particularly prevalent in legumes where they are used for storage of sugars.
It doesn't mention starch in this context. (Is starch particularly "resistant to digestion"?)
Can anyone gainsay this? Otherwise I'll edit the article in a wee while.
JTN 21:35, 2004 Oct 14 (UTC)
Now done.
I note in passing that my reference gives significantly different figures for the composition of flatus to those given in the article:
- "Work in the late sixties showed that normal individuals averaged an output of about a pint of gas a day, of which half is nitrogen and the result of swallowing air along with food or drink. Another 40% is carbon dioxide and the product of aerobic bacteria in the intestine. The remaining small fraction is a mixture of hydrogen, methane, and hydrogen sulfide, the products of anaerobic bacteria, and ammonia and the highly odorous indoles and skatoles, to which all the bacteria contribute."
However, he does also note that these things are highly variable, as you might expect.
Anyway, that's probably enough hot air from me.
JTN 20:50, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)
Euphemsms question
Okay, is "mess your pants" and the equivalents starting with sh** really euphemisms for flatulence, or do they more accurately describe the proverbial "accident?" --Joe Sewell 16:32, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I don't think they are, and neither are most of the things under "euphemisms". Remember that a euphemism is a non-offensive way of saying something, and I hardly think things like "ass perfume" qualify. So I've divided the list into euphemisms and dysphemisms. I also deleted a few of them simply because they didn't seem to be referring to farting but to a rare unfortunate side-effect of farting (or to other activities entirely). If anyone disagrees re-add them. Reene (リニ) 02:34, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The Thunder from Down Under
What causes the noise of a pooder? Garrett Albright 05:30, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
request for audio files to accompany article
It would be very encyclopedic! :-)
- Don't think there's very many people in the world who haven't heard this sound before... Garrett Albright 09:01, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Is there any need?, do we need audio files for laughing, eating, clapping, talking, etc. Only deaf people have not heard a fart, and I doubt a sound file will fix that.--Clawed 11:14, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Burping and Farting
Hi, just correcting a common misconception about bovine flatulence and the greenhouse effect; the methane in fact mostly comes from animals burping rather than farting (see [1] (http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s310139.htm) ), and I've corrected the article to reflect this.
Ziggurat 02:21, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC) (who has heard all the NZ sheep jokes he needs to)
Dysphemisms
By all means, if I accidentally removed a few that are in fact used and well-known somewhere in the world, re-add them (though I would defy you to find a part of the world in which "shit your pants" is a dysphemism for farting). But please do not blanketly revert my changes, especially when I'm quite confident that most of the bullets I removed are patent nonsense added by anons wishing to leave a mark on the article. The list was large and unwieldy, and ideally it should really only list the most well-known dysphemisms used. The list is not meant to document every single dysphemism ever used by any human being, after all, it's meant to serve as an example in the context of the article by listing a few well-known terms. →Reene✎ 10:22, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
I have not heard 90% of the dysphemisms you have retained. So on what basis are words to be retained? Shall I delete all those I have not heard of? I suspect every word that has been included in this list has been heard by someone and few if any are inventions. I believe the slang words for flatulence occupy a secret and private space in society around family and close friends and Wikipedia is an opportunity to list and share these with both a scientific and humorous result. So I vote for keeping this list as open and as extensive as possible, I have made it into an alphabetic list of paragraphs so that it takes up less space. Lumos3 23:10, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I would encourage you to use the google test in this instance, as I have. For example, "cut the cheese" gets 22,000 hits. "Let one rip" gets 6,230. On the other hand, ones like "lay an air biscuit" gets a whopping 95, and "ass perfume" gets 81. Continue ad nauseum. I notice you also removed "fart" from the list for some reason, and that one gets over two and a half million hits. I'd also like to remind you that Wikipedia does not serve as a repository for every slang term and neologism ever coined. If it's not got some measure of notability, then it doesn't belong on a list where it only serves to bloat the article. →Reene✎ 01:42, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Wikipedia does contain glossary pages for various specialised fields (see Wikipedia is not) and I believe this list fits this criteria. I like the idea of using Google to cheek the currency of terms . I have a dictionary of historical slang which contains dozens of possible candidates none in current use but all relevant to the article . Perhaps in the future the article could divide terms by century as well .Lumos3 11:14, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Slang terms for flatulence, the last time that I checked, do not constitute a "specialised field" that deserves a glossary page. Only terms with some notability (and this goes double for slang) deserve mentions on Wikipedia. As Reene has demonstrated, "fart", "cut the cheese", and "let one rip" all have a massive amount of currency and notability. "Ass perfume" and "lay an air biscuit" on the other hand do not. Please don't add them again until they do. [[User:Premeditated Chaos|]] 04:07, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Is the history of flatulence and the terms used to describe it not a valid area for this article to expand into. Historic terms may have little currency or Google hits but are still of interest. Lumos3 22:14, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Flatulence has a history? Have farts evolved over time? Come on. And you do not expect me to believe that "lay an
assair biscuit" is a historical term for fart. Please tell me you don't. [[User:Premeditated Chaos|]] 23:56, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC) -- Sorry, "air" biscuit.
- Flatulence has a history? Have farts evolved over time? Come on. And you do not expect me to believe that "lay an
Damned kids...
That's a neat trick; the offending text below isn't in obvious in the code. I thought I could get rid of it, but maybe not. Maybe someone else got to it seconds before I did.
"Flatulence my dad fart at homwe all the time so i have a real gas mask i carry around with me hows about dat lol hashahahha consists of gases that are produced by symbiotic bacteria and yeasts living in the gastrointestinal tract of mammals and are released through the anus. Flatulence is known colloquially as farting."
- Don't worry - apparently someone got to it just before you did =) [[User:Premeditated Chaos|]] 22:45, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Sound amplitude plot for deaf people
Hi, ..I just read someone before mentioned that deaf people are the only who did not hear fart sunds. It would be thus useful to add sound amplitude plot. Also, composition of gasses in form of chart or pie-chart would be more useful than reading through sentences to gain information on composition of gasses. There are also studies that were conducted at various scientific institutions that include thermal images of flatulance "event" itself, showing warmer gasses escaping from the "rear" in red and orange colors while the surrounding is left in blue.
Palliatives
Many people notice that if they reduce their intake of most refined carbohydrates such as rice, pasta, potatoes, and breads, their stomach gas production decreases significantly. What is the evidence for this? I'm not a nutritionist, but I've never heard of rice and potatoes described as being refined carbohydrates.--JBellis 18:40, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Whoever smelt it, dealt it. Whoever made the rhymme, did the crime.
Encyclopediciety
At the moment, the article has only one reference: a cookbook. That's rather thin. Does anyone have access to a more, shall we say, "core text" on flatulence?
- Dunno about core texts. The following looks like the most relevant reference in McGee's bibliography:
- Template:Journal reference
- Chasing this [2] (http://www.annalsnyas.org/content/vol150/issue1/) suggests other relevant reading. -- JTN 20:33, 2005 Apr 3 (UTC)
I also changed the very long list of eu- and dysfemisms into running text, to avoid dysbalance. I do not think Hindi and Malay terms should be mentioned here, unless they have significant usage amongst English speakers.
- I suspect this whole section should probably be in Wiktionary, in its capacity as a thesaurus. (I believe that non-English terms would be appropriate in Wiktionary.) -- JTN 20:33, 2005 Apr 3 (UTC)
Are there cultures in which farting in public is accepted? At the moment, the "social context" paragraph is rather unspecific. JFW | T@lk 20:01, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Selling Beans
Don't you think they should sell baked beans at gas station convenience stores -- just so people can get gas for themselves as well as for their cars?
lol =P
Flarn 20:12, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)
A poem about farts
Beans, beans,
They're the musical fruit.
The more you eat 'em,
The more you toot!
Beans, beans,
They're good for your heart.
The more you eat 'em,
the more you fart!
Flarn 20:12, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)
Hello everybody, I added a few lines adding some stuff about Dante's Inferno, in which he said something funny about the topic!
--Chicco 16:42, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
Trivia
Recently I spent quite some time mercilessly slashing teenage humour and irrelevant trivia. Gradually, more stuff in inserted. All those quotes from Dante and Rabelais are very funny, but there must be hundreds of these in world literature. Similarly, the episode of a British royal is very funny but probably not the only one of its kind. The list would be endless, similar to the list of slang words which I murdered recently.
If Wikipedia wants to be taken seriously as an encyclopedia, it needs to be able to treat even a smelly subject like flatulence with a certain degree of seriousness. JFW | T@lk 07:25, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- On a similar note, I see our inexhaustible lists of euphemisms and dysphemisms are back. To me, it seems that if these belong anywhere, they belong in Wiktionary. (...oh, I said that already. Never mind.) -- JTN 12:17, 2005 May 22 (UTC)
Dear JFW, I don't think you should judge funny what you read about Dante at least. The Divine Comedy is a pillar of Italia literature and compulsory in Italian high schools. La bocca sollevò dal fiero pasto, he raised his mouth from the fierce meals, referring to a man punished to starvation along his children is just a few line far from the line I put in the article. I think we should add aspects referring to the article that are part of our culture, i mean, Rabealis is not south park, is the heritage of a time that is in us, even if us don't know nothing about it. I you are diserting about the importance of flatulence in linguistic you cannot, you cannot skip the Literature
I hope you would restore the tiny article related to history, I think an Enciclopaedia must be complete.
P.S. why don't you erase the line the refers to the number of flatulence we perform, everyone does them and you dno't need some expensive calculator to count them!--Chicco 17:48, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- I wish you hadn't titled your response "Arrogance", because this indicates you have utterly missed the point. I am not saying that literary references are out of the question, but there needs to be a firm guarantee that only the best known references end up in this article, before South Park and The Simpsons enter through the side door.
- Please provide some form of evidence that the Dante and Rabelais quotes are indeed the best known references in literature to flatulence. If they are, then I will personally reinsert them without reservations.
- Do me a favour, and don't take things personally, Chicco. This attitude is the death of the wiki. JFW | T@lk 19:12, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
Well, maybe I was to rough, but the authors I quoted are the pillars of italian and French literature, somewhat a Shakespeare for someone who doesn't know them!. I wish more people will add referencies to GREAT authors who were able to talk of such disgusting activity. I think you should put back the stuff about Queen Elizabeth, notionism is the base of a wide open mind, after all I don't like and probably won't understand completely Einstein's theories. have a nice day --Chicco 20:52, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- Please make a WikiQuote page for any other literary farts you may like to quote. JFW | T@lk 14:20, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
"Linguistics" and the superglue troll
User:Zanuga put back the list of words. As Wikipedia is not a thesaurus, I contest the need for such as list. No other article about a non-taboo subject needs a list of euphemisms, dysphemisms etc. I do not claim to be a linguistics expert, but I am trying to keep this article free from adolescent rubbish.
As for the superglue joke: the page you quote is about using superglue as a way to heal lacerations. Your trolling is inexcusable. JFW | T@lk 16:31, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
- The linguistics section highlights the fact that euphemisms and dysphemisms are an integral part of how people refer to the subject. It is therefore helpful for the fuller understanding of the subject if the many and varied expressions used are identified for the purposes of research and education. Other people can be expected to add to the list and so improve the understanding of worldwide readers. Many euphemisms and dysphemisms will be more local in expression but can provide a reference for those encountering them. The intent is not to provide a thesaurus but to illumninate. The linguistics has no other statemnent other than "euphemism and dysphemism". Either employ it as a meaningful section or remove it altogether.
User:Zanuga | 00:04, 27 May 2005
They do not illuminate, they clutter. They also attract vandals and trolls (see the edit history). If you are that sure about the merits of this section, perhaps we should take this to requests for comment. JFW | T@lk 20:07, 26 May 2005 (UTC)