From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Pharmacology (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.


In an article in National Geographic on caffeine, it explicitly says that caffeine is not a diuretic, however I can only find references to Coffee's affect not being a diuretic (because the water in a cup coffee is much more than the diuretic effect of the caffeine).


I also read the same National Geographic article and remember it saying that coffee did not dehydrate you. I could not determine if the article for diruetic said that diruetics could cause dehydration! -dan (j0)

I haven't had a chance to read that article but caffeine is considered a diuretic. This effect is seen in relatively high doses, and tolerance to its effects develops rapidly. Thus in most settings, it doesn't really have a diuretic effect as such (Maughan & Griffin, 2003). -Techelf 07:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I would like to contribute about this topic soon when I have more time. But, searches on pubmed have shown me that it doesn't seem to be a diuretic on the level of the organism. In the kidney caffeine seems to increase cAMP or something and increase glomerular filtration (indirectly by increasing renal blood flow). But, when athletes or sedentary people are given caffeine, their urine output doesn't increase beyond placebo groups, indictating it isn't a diuretic. There is also a specific study that shows that in an athlete, urine production isn't any higher for athletes on caffeine vs placebo. This is relevant because many weekend warriors avoid caffeine while working out due to being afraid of dehydrating, which is not true. Its actually better to take caffeine for its glucose sparring and increasing in mobilization of free fatty acids. Rjkd12 14:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article on caffeine states that caffeine is not a diuretic and lists several references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

side effects[edit]

what are the long and short term side effects of directs..i know the common and rare ones but not short and long? please help

how many people take diuretics[edit]

how many people take diuretics...i know why people take them but i cant find anywhere that it tells me how many people actually take them (graphs, statistics??) please help


How long does it take for these drugs to work? Is the timescale over days or hours? Would be helpful to include in article please (talk) 17:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC) spironolactone about 24 hours ,loop diuretics within minutes

Osmotic Diuretics?[edit]

It may be slightly intuitive, but an explanation how these work would be nice.

Removed the following text: "or people with internal viruses such as HEP B/C or HIV/AIDS 79.9% of people crush up the pill and take it by mouth via spoon because the full 100mg pill might be excessive and could result in vomiting or constant diarrhea. Also, " from the article as it appeared dubious at best, and vandalism at worst. I wanted to put it here in case anyone wanted to verify/pursue this. Supasheep (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Badly written[edit]

this article is very badly written so Im going to take the liberty to make it more clear and better written

Seriously. Normal people need to know what a diuretic does. Can somebody PLEASE explain this so the layman can understand? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerbilio (talkcontribs) 09:20, 10 February 2009 (UTC) Markthemac (talk) 03:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Every diuretic does reduce tubular resorption of water (i.e. of primary urine = Glomerular filtration rate = creatinine clearance = kidney function). Normal tubular rate of resorption is 99 percent. So 1 % of GFR is volume of urine. For example: GFR = 105 ml/min ≈ 150 l/d. One Percent of GFR = 1,5 liter of Urine per day. Approximately every kidney's GFR is 1 % of cardiac output. For example: CO = 5000 ml/min → GFR of one single human adult kidney = 50 ml/min. --Dr. Hartwig Raeder (talk) 07:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC)--Dr. Hartwig Raeder (talk) 07:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Diuretics as a Banned Substance in Sports[edit]

This article needs information as to why diuretics are banned in sports (what athletes gain from taking them, what sports ban them, etc...). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 14:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

In-article commentary[edit]

Someone added this to the body of the article itself:


The first sentence says diuretics are meant to treat 4 negative health conditions, but there is more to it than that. It is also used to control negative conditions in certain patients with those conditions listed above. So, for example, you should not interpret the harshness of the first claim which states: "diuretics are used to treat heart failure"

Diuretics can be used to prevent heart failure in the first place. The way it is written above makes it sound like diuretics are just a cure for some considerably risky health issues (see above).

If the person who added this would like to make the article more nuanced, we would all benefit. Thanks. --Antelan talk 04:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

More general info[edit]

This article seems not to be written for a general audience. It should contain more general information in layman's terms about the effects of diuretics and as to why they are good and why they are bad. --Bsmithme (talk) 03:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

See above Number 6. --Dr. Hartwig Raeder (talk) 07:54, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

History section[edit]

I'm curious about the term, and where it comes from. How long has the term been in use? Who named it? Why? The dictionary definition of diuretic at Wiktionary doesn't mention etymology.

Heavy Joke (talk) 06:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)


I reverted the addition of dandelion to potassium-sparing diuretics for a couple of reasons: first, you can't make a contentious claim like this without properly sourcing it. Dandelion has been used in folk remedies as a diuretic, but I know of no source that claims it reliably safe as such. Second, there exists a reliable source that says that taking dandelion concurrently with potassium-sparing diuretics can lead to hyperkalemia (because the former contains large amounts of potassium). See: Leha Carpenter (talk) 00:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


Mercurials are also a class of diuretics which include drugs like Sodium Mmercaptomerin. I think it is also to be included in the classification of diuretics.

Jyoti bharadwaj (talk) 07:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Diuretic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:07, 14 December 2016 (UTC)