Talk:Work of breathing

Breathing performance of regulators

@Pbsouthwood: There's an article on Breathing performance of regulators (first Wikipedia article I created!) that probably contains useful additional information and references. --RexxS (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I remember it, - its on my watchlist. • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 19:26, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Generalised derivation for elastic work of breathing

Here it is the relation between work done by respiratory muscles only against the elastic recoil of lungs. Actually, lung compliance is the stretchability of lung. This equation is derived for only short range of lung volume having constant compliance. Again the expression shows work of breathing only against the elastic recoil of lungs.

Compliance c = dv/dp So c.dp = dv. ........(eq.2)

Integrate for both the sides

P.c = v + a .....(a will be const.). .....(eq.1)

This relation holds true for constant compliance. The compliance will remain constant only for short interval. For the short interval...

Expression for work done by muscles on elastic recoil will be

dW = P.dv

dW = P.c.dp. .....( From eq.1). Integrate both the sides

W = p^2.c/2 . W = v^2/2c

That means, work done against elastic recoil of lungs is inversely proportional to compliance of lung for constant ventilation. Compliance of lung is variable and it is less in case of less volume (due to surface tension effect) and at high lung volume(due to reached elastic limit of lungs). The compliance of lung cancer be understood by the slope of volume pressure graph for lungs.

(Note: this derivation has some considerations, this derivation is only to find the relation of lung compliance with the work done against elastic recoil Mahesh kur (talk) 06:06, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Is there any mistakes ?

Mahesh kur (talk) 06:24, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

@Mahesh kur: Unfortunately, there are three mistakes:

1. The calculus in your derivations assume constant compliance, for which there's no evidence.
2. You've made the assumption that those simplified calculations of the work of breathing correspond to the work done in realistic circumstances. There are many confounding factors and you don't supply any sources that analyse those.
3. Without sources, your derivations constitute original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia.

I suggest you either cite the sources that you're working from, or remove the section from the article. --RexxS (talk) 19:57, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I've removed the section and placed it on this talk page for review:

Here it is the relation between work done by respiratory muscles only against the elastic recoil of lungs. Actually, lung compliance is the stretchability of lung.

Compliance c = dv/dp

So c.dp = dv. ........(eq.2)

Integrate for both the sides

P.c = v + a .....(a will be const.). .....(eq.1)

This relation holds true for constant compliance. The compliance will remain constant only for short interval. For the short interval...

Expression for work done by muscles on elastic recoil will be

dW = P.dv

dW = P.c.dp. .....( From eq.1). Integrate both the sides

W = p^2.c/2 . W = v^2/2c

That means, work done against elastic recoil of lungs is inversely proportional to compliance of lung for constant ventilation. Compliance of lung is variable and it is less in case of less volume (due to surface tension effect) and at high lung volume(due to reached elastic limit of lungs). The compliance of lung cancer be understood by the slope of volume pressure graph for lungs.

(Note: this derivation has some considerations, this derivation is only to find the relation of lung compliance with the work done against elastic recoil.)

It needs to quote the reliable sources where the information was found, and some justification for why the calculus and its lack of applicability in real situations should be part of this article. --RexxS (talk) 19:09, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

5% of total oxygen consumption

The claim at the bottom of the introduction section, "In a normal resting state the work of breathing constitutes about 5% of the total body oxygen consumption" is currently unsourced. I found this source thereto: How Much Oxygen Does the Human Lung Consume, but it seems to me (a layperson) that the 5% claim refers to just the lungs, and not the diaphragm - ie, the oxygen used to keep the lungs alive but not to mechanically breathe. Could someone who knows a little more about biology confirm whether my interpretation is correct, and whether the claim on the page is backed? Onepo (talk) 06:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)