Talk:Stomach rumble

Last paragraph

That last bit just doesnt seem quite right, you know? Besides, lots of dieticians recommend lots of small meals throughout the day anyhow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.38.130 (talk) 17:43, 26 January 2005 (UTC)

Depends completely on the cause. People with a very active gastrocolic reflex will notice more borborygmus after eating. JFW | T@lk 04:44, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Magic: the Gathering

Hey, should someone add a cultural reference to Borborygmos the Magic: the Gathering character? --71.125.9.240 17:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Can someone please provide the correct pronunciation of this? Gserra 14:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Removing Snapple Real Facts reference; cannot be confirmed

I've removed the following:

;Trivia 
The definition is listed as Snapple 'Real Fact' #364.

The reason is that, in answer to a request for a list of their Real Facts, BrandsPeopleLove.com consumer relations declined to provide any corroboration. I wrote Your real facts are listed on Wikipedia, but cannot be verified because you don't offer a comprehensive list on your site. Please provide a list, or the "real facts" will need to be removed from Wikipedia. Thanks! Here's the reply I got.

Dear Mr. Spalding,

Thank you for contacting us regarding Snapple Real Facts. Snapple Real Facts are true to the best of our knowledge. The facts come from a variety of different sources as follows:
· Animalogy: Weird and Wacky Animal Facts
· General Knowledge Trivia Quiz Book: Trivial Truths
· Mistakes that worked: 40 Familiar Inventions and How They Came to Be
· Quizzing: Everything You Always Wanted to Know, But Didn't Know Where to Look
· The Book of 10,001 Trivia Questions
· Plus multiple websites on true facts

We appreciate you contacting us and hope you will continue to enjoy our brands.

— Consumer Relations Reference # 1-78744454, consumer.relations@brandspeoplelove.com

That "plus multiple websites on true facts" statement worries me. This makes Snapple a third party reference, and facts cannot be confirmed from "multiple web sites" as a verified, reliable source. David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 18:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Mrrr!

Come on! tons of edits by various authors and still not a single reference? --piksi (talk) 19:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Olive oil

"It is thought that some borborygmi can be treated with the ingestion of olive oil, allowing the fatty acids to decrease the muscular contractions of the intestines."

I don't see how this would work (FAs decrease muscle contractions since when?, so moved it here pending citations to a source that believes it.YobMod 17:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Onomatopoeia?

The article refers to American Heritage Dictionary for the origin of the word as an onomatopoeia. It must be noted, however, that the greek Borboros (βόρβορος) --translates as mud, mire, mess or muck-- may be related to the emerging gas bubbles observed in swamps and other muddy places. Could someone confirm or deny this? --itveiizandr (itveiizandr) 18:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Confusing definitions of the term

I find the summary definition in the first sentence to be strangely incongruous with the subsequent two paragraphs. In the former, borborygmus is defined as the rumbling generated by the movement of gases in the intestines; in the latter, it is defined as muscle contractions in the intestines.

In the final paragraph the movement of gases is given as a possible alternative cause, which seems to undermine the first sentence, which seems to present the movement of gases as the main cause.

I've made what seems like an appropriate edit to the first sentence. Hopefully the definition is clearer now. --JohnJSal (talk) 07:33, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Typo

In the story “Alas poor Maling” his tummy rumbles iMitate not iRRitate noises he has recently heard.

As a sexual fetish

Stomach rumbling forms a part of human sexuality as it seems to be a relatively common fetish like many others, thus a section about it should be added. ~2025-37890-28 (talk) 22:46, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Listening to bowel sounds

Bowel sounds are not useful for diagnosis.

44% of clinicians rarely listen to them because 44% understand there is no situation where they would rely on such information to inform a diagnosis. I say rarely instead of never because sometimes you listen to their abdomen in order to press into them with your stethoscope to see if they really are as tender to touch as they act when you palpate. Most of the rest listen because they have to chart the results, out of habit, as a safety blanket to support the diagnosis they already know, or fear that someone will yell at them if they don't.

Nurses, doctors, are told by their elders to listen to bowel sounds (sometimes for 20 minutes—which nobody does); that if they hear none it indicates obstruction. Obstruction, however, usually begins with the bowels hyperactive as they try to clear the obstruction, and only later progresses to hypoactive or absent bowel sounds once motility fails, at which point you normally have already concluded that they are obstructed. Generally though an absence of bowel sounds indicates nothing other than that your bowels are just resting normally.

There are other ways clinicians variably purport to use bowel sounds, and there are other problems with them. Unfortunately, I cannot find a more recent review of the auscultation of bowel sounds since 2009 because nobody studies bowel sounds because anyone who studies knows their auscultation is useless. Accordingly, I have edited the article to reflect the lack of evidence for this practice. If someone finds a more recent review attesting to this lack of evidence then please feel free to update. ເສລີພາບ (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2026 (UTC)