Talk:Premenstrual syndrome

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Premenstrual syndrome article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
B	This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance assessment scale

Archives

2004-2007.

Contents 1 Occurrence in twins 2 Anyone read Norwegian? 3 Diagnosis 4 Archive 5 NPOV, controversies, non-western views

[edit] Occurrence in twins

The article says, "PMS tends to be more common among twins". This seems to say that a person who has a twin is more likely than average to experience PMS. Shouldn't this passage read, "The occurrence of PMS in one twin leads to a higher-than-average occurrence of PMS in the other", or something to that effect? --bdesham ★ 05:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"Leads to" doesn't make sense, as PMS in one wouldn't cause it in the other. I assume that you're suggesting that the intended meaning is that they tend to have similar symptom patterns. HOWEVER, there are other twin-related remarks (including the monozygotic (identical) versus dizygotic (fraternal) tendency comparison [which is mentioned twice, but i'm not sure which should be removed]. Those suggest that it is that monozygotic twins are each generally more proned to it than other women. So no edit seems to be necessary (other than, perhaps, eliminating the redundancy). (Though i'm also curious about dizygotic twins vs non-twins.)
—überRegenbogen (talk) 14:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Anyone read Norwegian?

The lead claims that 14% of women stay home from school or work due to PMS. It's not clear whether this means "at least once per cycle" or "at least once per lifetime." The ref is in Norwegian.[1] If you read Norwegian, can you enlighten the rest of us? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I interpret that as when they're experiencing it.
—überRegenbogen (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

So you think it means "14% of women have severe PMS." I had assumed that it could mean "14% of women miss school or work a dozen times a year, for the 35ish years between puberty (PMS onset) and menopause (PMS end)" -- which, to be honest, seems unreasonable to me. I think that if 14% of all women missed work every month, it would be perfectly obvious to all of us. I wish we could actually get reliable information on this. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The reference mirrors pretty precisely what is stated here. A study commissioned by the manufacturer Always (product) indicates that 14% of Norwegian women between 20-35 experience menstrual pain to such a degree they are prevented from going to work/school. Typical to such questionnaires, there is nothing in the data to distinguish between "every cycle" or having experienced it at some point. Hope that helps. MURGH ^disc. 18:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

It helps enormously, because menstrual pain is not the same as PMS. Thank you! WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad. You're welcome. MURGH ^disc. 20:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Diagnosis

Are there any reasonably reliable sources out there for diagnostic criteria? What I specifically want to know is whether the emotional components are necessary for a PMS diagnosis. Is a consistent cyclic pattern of, say, bloating and itchy breasts and headaches --but with no psycho-emotional changes -- good enough for a diagnosis? (If so, then I don't get the claims that this is a made-up syndrome with no biological basis.) On the flip side, if you throw a temper tantrum a few days before each menstrual flow, but have no other symptoms, is that good enough for a PMS diagnosis? (If so, I begin (barely) to understand the complaints about PMS being a way of devaluing women's emotions.)

There's got to be something out there that's a little more rigorous than what this article presents at the moment. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

This may be a good place to start -- see table 2. According to the UCSD criteria, an affective component is required. --Arcadian (talk) 06:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

I have created an archive of the old discussions. I have copied back to this page all recent conversations. In case anyone needs to know in the future, I used the Move Page method. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV, controversies, non-western views

Hey all, I was just browsing through the this article and noticed the controversies section had some serious POV issues. It largely asserted the view of feminist critics. (Perhaps it was largely copied from someone's gender-studies textbook or term-paper?...) I've done a few basic fixes, but more work may still be needed. It looks like more research and citations are needed - particularly with regard to the section on non-western views. It seems to argue that non-westerners have a much more positive view of menstruation. I'm not an expert on this, but from what I've heard, many traditional cultures have women completely isolated during this time. So yeah, more work is probably needed, but at least it reads fairly NPOV now :-) ~CantBeBotheredToLogin 118.92.65.128 (talk) 00:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)