Talk:Intestinal water absorption

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for creating this page for a core concept in Physiology; I was surprised that it didn't exist. I've looked for coverage elsewhere, and think that this warrants separte coverage. There are a number of textbook and other review sources (of variable quality) in support.

Klbrain (talk) 12:53, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Link to AI source

The fact that glucose aids water absorption uses the following source, <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-05-13 |title=What are the three mechanisms of water absorption in the colon? |url=https://droracle.ai/articles/117583/what-are-the-three-mechanisms-of-water-absorption-in-the-colon |access-date=2025-07-20 |website=droracle.ai |language=en}}</ref>

Which is AI generated and not particularly high quality at that.

If someone has a better reference we should replace it.

Daaash (talk) 11:08, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This website should be considered WP:Unreliable, especially the article has both

a claim that "All articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board"
a warning to "Exercise caution as content is pending human review" [emphasis mine]

Informaldehyde (talk) 04:35, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Especially since (accidentally a word). (Also linking to archived version for future reference: https://web.archive.org/web/20251229085858/https://www.droracle.ai/articles/117583/what-are-the-three-mechanisms-of-water-absorption-in) Informaldehyde (talk) 04:36, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Updated to add: also contains very basic errors, such as counting "osmosis" and "passive diffusion" as two different mechanisms. Informaldehyde (talk) 05:34, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Oh, it's even worse. I checked the source cited in the AI article (plus others); it was actually a lot more complicated and conditional. It's like a game of telephone, through which "glucose sometimes aids absorption, sometimes promotes secretion, depending on other conditions" gets flattened into "glucose can enhance absorption". Informaldehyde (talk) 04:40, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Claims not supported by citations

Many claims in this article seem to fail verification, suffer from WP:Improper synthesis or contain original research. I've tried to track down a lot of the sources referenced, and they overwhelmingly concern water transport in general, NOT in the intestines.

For example, the Clinical Pathology one (pp. 325–374. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-803620-4.00014-1) only mentions the GI tract twice, and both times it discusses losses to other electrolytes or nutrients as a result of water loss. Discussion of mechanisms for water absorption (or loss) is entirely absent from that article, even though it is cited here to support a claim about electrolytes. The same is true for the News-Medical article on the large intestine. ~2026-35585-30 (talk) 23:07, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]