![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I thought you all checked all these sources? Can I timestamp this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.94.99 ( talk) 19:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I think strictly, mathematically, speaking, the fact that a lunar cycle is 28 days, combined with this variable "science", logic dictates that there might be one (or realistically several) women that speak or read English have a cycle that closely mimics a lunar cycle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.94.99 ( talk) 19:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Strike all the illogical, erroneous moon-tales from this article. They are unsupported. The lunar phase of the urban legend even contradicts tales mentioned in one of the links mentioning moon-phases. The other moon-link is useless as well as it drops you at a search and not a specific reference.
You call this Space Age Medicine? Hmmmmppft 72.251.0.19 09:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.0.19 ( talk • contribs) 09:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Elettaria ( talk) 13:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Elettaria ( talk • contribs) 13:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
The medical consensus seem to be that it's just a coincidence. I'm removing the association made in the article.
http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/astro/astro2001/projects/luna/menstruation/mencycle.htm http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/2056/is-the-human-menstrual-cycle-related-to-the-lunar-cycle http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1348/whats-the-link-between-the-moon-and-menstruation Mihaiam ( talk) 20:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
"two become dominant (non-dominant" in the introduction this parenthesis is never closed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.177.174.137 ( talk) 19:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I just moved
The average age of menarche is about 12.5 years in the United States, [1] 12.72 in Canada, [2] 12.9 in the UK [3] and 13.06 ± 0.10 years in Iceland. [4]
from the lede to the first section of the article, because it is too detailed, in my opinion, for the lede. I actually think it's too detailed for this article and it belongs in Menarche where it is already covered, but will wait to see what others think. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 14:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
I have amended the last paragraph of the 'Luteal Phase' section, regarding hCG production, for greater accuracy. A small part of the article overall but as a lab medicine professional one I felt needed clarification! FlowersAndFilth ( talk) 13:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
I propose to add a short paragraph on the menstrual cycle in relation to the moon. It makes clear that while no statistical association between the moon and human menstruation has been documented in any extant population, this is not necessarily the end of the matter. From a deep-time evolutionary perspective, many reputable primatalogists and other scientists have considered the possibility that seasonal, tidal and other forms of synchrony may have had an adaptive basis in the past, just as they continue to have an adaptive basis among certain extant primate species. Altg20April2nd ( talk) 11:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Again, please read the literature. Menstrual cycles are not 28 days in length. Research has found over numerous studies that cycle are between 29 to 30 days on average. Please cite exactly which studies found 28 days.-- I am One of Many ( talk) 22:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Note: The above about 28 days is in response to this matter. Flyer22 ( talk) 22:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I suggest for now using [2] as a source. It states that the 28-day menstrual cycle is the "textbook" length but it is actually extremely variable. I would be happy to go with that. Are you able to download the article for free?-- I am One of Many ( talk) 23:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Flyer22: The idea that the human menstrual cycle is 28 days seems to be little more that a popular convention or myth, based on convenience in fitting to the modern western notion of a four-week calendrical month. The four-week month is artificial and has nothing to do with human evolution, being a recent calendrical invention. I know of no scientific statistical study or survey which has come up with the figure of 28 days for the human female menstrual cycle. Every study has come up with somewhere between 29.2 and 29.5 days. In younger women, during their most fertile years, the length tends to be closer to 29.5, while in later years it typically becomes shorter and shorter. It is mainly owing to the inclusion of short cycles (e.g. 27 days) in later years that studies often produce an average of somewhat less than 29.5 days. Many biologists would consider that what matters most in terms of human evolution and human nature is the length of the cycle during the most fertile years of life. This turns out to parallel quite closely the length of the synodic lunar cycle - 29.5 days. As for the idea of not using careful studies conducted a few decades ago, why not? As long as more recent studies are included as well, that's surely OK. I would query the idea that in recent years, the length of the human menstrual cycle has changed. I would be interested to know where this strange idea has come from? I know of no scientific study which would even concede that such a thing is possible. Individual cycle lengths are of course variable. Age at menarche is also culturally variable, being influenced by such factors as exposure to artificial light. But for the entire human species to change from one average cycle length to a shorter one within the course of a few decades would be genetically inexplicable, wouldn't it? Altg20April2nd ( talk) 14:48, 6 July 2013 (UTC) Altg20April2nd ( talk) 20:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment. While I don't mind the idea of describing the variability of the menstrual cycle in detail, I wish to caution editors about the use of the primary literature. It is not as simple as just picking and presenting a grand average. If you look very closely at the classic studies (e.g., Gunn et al., Chiazze et al.), you will notice that 1) the sample distributions in those studies are skewed and are never normal, i.e., bell-shaped curve, 2) there is a greater variability when the average is taken at 29 days and less variability when taken at 28 days, 3) the so called 28 day average is often the modal number and 4) other high quality and acceptable sources designate 28 days as the average. So presenting just one average number from a small set of studies without any context is very misleading and simplistic. Cherry picking a set of numbers, etc often leads to original research ( WP:OR) or POV pushing, which is against WP policy. Again, we should follow WP policy and stick primarily to mainstream secondary sources that are representative of the mainstream literature. danielkueh ( talk) 00:55, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I was a little surprised that in the very first paragraph, this article talks about the menstrual cycle as if it was some kind of dysfunction or disease, describing it in terms of "symptoms" that "interfere with normal life". The menstrual cycle isn't something that happens to women on certain days of the month (that would be menstruation itself); the existence of a menstrual cycle is "normal life" for women between puberty and menopause. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 00:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Note: Per this discussion at Talk:Estrous cycle, a class is currently working on this article. This is seen, for example, when it comes to edits by Smandalia ( talk · contribs) and Nisep ( talk · contribs). Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 23:09, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
AH2960, BF2510 and I would like to use the topic of Menstrual cycle effects on shopping, eating and mating habits. ( BD441 ( talk) 12:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)) BD441 ( talk) 12:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
AH2960 ( talk) 14:16, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
BF2510 ( talk) 15:22, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
BD441 ( talk) 16:23, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
We will be adding information about the effects of menstrual cycle length on sexual behaviour frequency in premenopausal women. (Cutler, Garcia and Kreiger, 1978). We will also add information about ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap dancers (Milly, Tybur, Jordan, 2007). We will also discuss the effects of menstrual cycle shifts on womens mate preferences and face perception (Penton-Voak et al 1999). ( Swifty1995 ( talk) 18:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC))
Feedback: Under the spending habits section, a sentence on why these differences in spending occur would be really interesting. Similarly, a sentence on why the products women buy change across the cycle would be useful to fully explain the topic. Rcuf235 ( talk) 10:09, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I have a few comments for improving this article for Human Sexuality. Firstly, this article is a featured articles, therefore it has been identified as one of the best articles produced by Wikipedia. Even so, it can still be improved. Firstly, you could possibly consider combining ‘Etymological’ and ‘The Mood’ in to one section. Under the ‘Work’ section, it may also be interesting to explain why the practice is controversial. Maybe explain the other side of the argument to ensure that it is not biased. I also copy-edited the section ‘Spending habits’. The sentence ‘women's product choice also differs across the menstrual cycle’, is unclear, as it sounds like it refers to sanitary products. I therefore changed this to ‘Women’s food and clothing choice also appears to differ across the menstrual cycle.' On a positive note, it is really interesting how it explains how the menstrual cycle can affect so many different disciplines, and it has been presented in an objective and unbiased way. Swifty1995 ( talk) 10:23, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review:
I think the article is great: really informative, well organised and quite interesting. My main suggestion would be to add some scientific research into why women's ability to work may or may not be impaired when menstruating. It would also be interesting to discuss, from an evolutionary point of view, changes in the duration of menstruation depending on the pheromones the woman menstruating is exposed to (e.g. there are studies that show that when exposed to higher levels of androgens than female hormones, the duration of menstruation shortens significantly). Really great article though, well done!! Robotsbackspaceraomeow ( talk) 21:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Overall, I think the new shopping habits section is an interesting addition to the page as it is something that has not been previously discussed in the article and it's beneficial to learn about how different behaviours change during a woman's cycle. The research used in this section has also been selected well as it is all highly relevant to the section. As well as this,you have used all the research appropriately as you simply just state the findings of the research and do not incorrectly interpret anything yourself from this research.
However I think the spending section could be improved slightly in several ways. Firstly, I think more research on the differences between pill users and non-pill users would be beneficial to add so it can been seen clearly whether there are differences in women's spending habits depending on whether they take the pill or not. I also think the section would be improved by adding explanations for why the changes in spending habits you have described occur across the menstrual cycle. Some explanations for why food choice and clothes choice differ within cycles would also be interesting to include. This would then mean that people can learn how spending habits, and food and clothes choice differ but would also be able to understand why these differences actually occur.
EmPhillips ( talk) 13:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
My main suggestions for improvement revolve around the structure of the article.
1. There are some repetitions in the article, the phrase “the average age of menarche is 12–15.They may occasionally start as early as eight, and this onset may still be normal. This first period often occurs later in the developing world than the developed world” appears twice, once in the introduction (it is worded just slightly differently here) and again in “Onset and frequency” section. The same is true for the phrase “length variation between eight and 20 days in a woman is considered as moderately irregular menstrual cycles Variation of 21 days or more is considered very irregular” being repeated in the “onset and frequency section”. I suggest you edit this so the phrases are no longer repeated.
2. I would suggest adding a citation to the phrase “The average age of menopause in women is 52 years, with anywhere between 45 and 55 being common” to make it more reliable.
3. You could create a separate section in “mood and behaviour” for how women’s behaviour and preference towards men changes, possibly including some information on how women’s cycle stages shape male mating behaviour.
4. As the “Work” section is pretty bare, you could note the Bristol company “coexist” is planning to create an official “period policy” designed to allow women (if needed) to take time off during their menstrual cycle.
Overall, I found this page to be very interesting and highly informative. All research and experimental findings are appropriate and relevant to the article. The “Society and culture” and “shopping habits” sections were a great addition, they prevent the article from being overly scientific.
Francesca alyse ( talk) 13:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Could remove the sentence that says " Alternatively, research has also been conducted on how the attractiveness of the female voice changes across the menstrual cycle." and instead go straight into explaining that this was found. Also, could explain what the pill is, maybe give its medical name for more clarity. Otherwise a really good section. Psundx ( talk) 14:43, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
As part of my university module, I have added the section 'Eating behaviour'. I would appreciate if people could have a look and give me any suggestions for improvement and/or feedback. Thanks! -- AH2960 ( talk) 12:14, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
The content below was added in these two difs; imported from this sandbox.
This content is sourced to a bunch of old primary sources as well as some popular press. Sourcing for this kind of content needs to follow WP:MEDRS. There is also some really dicey broad generalizations like the frst three sentences: "Behaviour towards potential mating partners changes during different phases in the cycle. Fertile woman show preference for males with good gene traits. (which is actually repeated)." and it goes on from there. This kind of biology-determining-behavior stuff is really dicey in general and needs to be handled with nuance, and very much sourced to reviews that are published high quality journals and textbooks to avoid the FRINGEy stuff that creeps into this.
Also this is a WP:FA and adding chunks of text like to FAs is not good; FAs need to be edited conservatively.
Behaviour towards potential mating partners changes during different phases in the cycle. [5] Fertile woman show preference for males with good gene traits. [6] [7] [8] Fertile woman show preference for males with good gene traits. [9] [10] Near ovulation women are found to have increased physical attraction and interest in attending social gatherings with men. [11] [12] When nearing ovulation in the cycle, women with partners experience more mate guarding (dependent on good gene indicators). [13] During the midcycle, increases in mate guarding has been found (for less attractive women). [14] [15] Pair bonded women report their partner as being more attentive when they are nearing ovulation. When fertility is low and on cycle days where progesterone is increased, women report high commitment to their current relationship. [16] On the other hand, during ovulation, women also report having more fantasies and sexual interest in non partners but not in their own partner. [17] [18] [19] They also feel more attraction to non partners when they are fertile as well as engaging in more extra-pair flirtation. [20] [21] [22] Women display a preference for extra pair copulation when they are in the fertile phase of the cycle, [23] despite this happiness in relationships does not change across the cycle. [24]
During the different phases of the menstrual, women's preferences for voice pitch changes. [25] Women seeking a short term mating partner, prefer a male with a low voice pitch, especially during the fertile phase of their cycle. [26] [27] Additionally, a preference for masculine male voices is found in women during the late follicular phase. [28] [29] [30] However, other research has found that only women with high pitched voices themselves found a more masculine voice attractive, and this was not related to which phase of the menstrual cycle she was in. [31] Alternatively, research has also been conducted on how the attractiveness of the female voice changes across the menstrual cycle. During their most fertile phase of the menstrual cycle, female’s voices are rated as significantly more attractive. This effect is not found with women on the pill. [32]
Women’s preference for male’s body odour changes across the menstrual cycle. [33] During the fertile phases of the menstrual cycle, males who score highly on a dominance scale are preferred by females. This effect however is dependent on relationship status, with single women the effect is less pronounced. [34] In regards to women's smell across the cycle, men have been found to use olfactory cues in order to know if a woman is ovulating. Men report rate women who are ovulating are rated as more attractive, by rating their odours. Men demonstrate preference for the scent of fertile women. [35] [36] Additionally, during their most fertile phase of the menstrual cycle women show preference for the odour of symmetrical men.This effect is not found for women on the pill. [37] [38]Not only do they demonstrate a preference for symmetrical men's scent but also, during the late follicular and ovulatory phases women prefer the scent of masculine men. [39] The scent of andostenone is highly preferred by women during the peak of their fertility in the menstrual cycle. [40] [41] Moreover, women demonstrate preference for men with a scent that indicates developmental stability. [42] [43]
Preferences for facial and bodily features in mates also change across the cycle. [44] [45]There has been no difference found in preference for long term mating partners during the menstrual cycle, however, those seeking a short term relationship were more likely to choose a partner with more masculine features than usual. [46] This was found to be the case especially during the woman’s high conception risk stage and when salivary testosterone was high. [47] [48] [49]However, when women are in the luteal (non fertile) phase, they prefer men (and females) with feminine faces. [50] [51] [52] A preference is also shown for self resembling faces and apparent health in faces during the luteal phase of the cycle. Apparent health preferences was found to be strongest when progesterone levels were high. [53] During the fertile phase of the cycle, women seeking a short term partner, seem to demonstrate a preference for taller and muscular males. [54] [55]As well as facial masculinity, women also show preferences of males with masculine bodies at peak fertility. [56] [57] [58]Mixed research has been found regarding facial and body symmetry preferences throughout different phases of the cycle. [59]
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite book}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
-- Jytdog ( talk) 23:06, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
This is about this series of diffs which did a bunch of complex things; the resulting content is below.
As with the section above, this paints way too broad a brush, and many of the sources are here are primary. for starters. This is an FA.
Research is emerging on how a woman's menstrual cycle impacts choices, and behaviours, in her life.
Economic spending patterns of women may change with the phase within their menstrual cycle. [1] One area of spending that has been found to be impacted is the control of spending across the phases. Among non-pill users the luteal phase corresponds to increased impulsivity in spending behaviour, which decreases during the follicular phase. [1]
Research into control of spending habits across the cycle observed a significant degree of variability with regard to bidding behaviour across the menstrual cycle within both pill users [2] as well as naturally cycling non-pill users. [3] One study examined self-control of spending across the cycle with regard to bidding behaviours. [3] It was found that when a woman experiences a natural cycle bids are significantly more, than the bids of men, across the whole cycle except for the ovulatory phase. [3] The research has produced mixed results with non-pill users demonstrating a flat pattern of bidding behaviour across the menstrual cycle. [2]
Research has also investigated how women's food and clothing choice also appears to differ across the menstrual cycle. A study found that food related consumption is greater than appearance related consumption in the luteal phase, where as in the fertile phase appearance related consumption is greater. [4] The fertile phase lead to a significant increase for sexy and attention grabbing items of clothing but does not significantly impact consumption of make-up related products. [4] It was additionally found that the hormonal changes that accompany the different phases of the menstrual cycle, specifically progesterone and oestrogen, have the same pattern as money spent on food related consumption and appearance related consumption respectively. [4]
The choices women make regarding attire have been found to differ according to their position within the menstrual cycle. [5] Women use their appearance in the same way a deer uses antlers for intra-sexual competition, rather than how a peacockuses his tail for courtship. [5] A pair of studies found that women are seen to prefer clothing that is more revealing and sexy when that are at peak fertility. [5] [6] This is demonstrated within hypothetical situations [6] as well as deliberate outfit choices. [5] Additionally such appearance enhancing behaviours are more prevalent when primed by attractive rivals. [5] One aspect of ornamentation difference around ovulation that has been found is the amount of skin that is shown, for example a skirt at high fertility where pants had been worn at low fertility. [7]
An increase in negative interpersonal relationships has been observed in women, especially during PMS, with an increase in undesirable social behaviour and increased passivity. [8] When PMS is experienced in the luteal phase an increase in negative interpersonal interactions has been observed.. [8] Some women have have been observed to decrease their social behaviours, becoming more withdrawn, during the luteal phase. [8] PMS symptomatology has been described by 60% of women in one study to include social problems, with a desire for an increase in time alone occurring during the luneal phase. [8]
References
-- Jytdog ( talk) 07:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
User:Morgangrizzle the content you want to add here doesn't comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you don't understand why, please ask. Thanks. Jytdog ( talk) 02:51, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
As per the advice to editors on the article page, I am indicating here that I have added the new women's health navbox template - see the Women's health project page which is being progressively added to women's health pages. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 17:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I have changed the opening paragraph to emphasise that the article is mainly about human biology, along with a small number of other mammals. It had not previously been clear in the opening of the article that the menstrual cycle mainly refers to human biology rather than to a wider group of animals. Boleslaw ( talk) 15:13, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
My edit of this article was to emphasise that this article is about human biology. I ensured that I did not cause the information about other animals to be repeated within the opening section. I moved this information to the opening paragraph, thus removing it from later in the opening section. My edit thus did not 'say this twice' in the opening section.
I think that the fact that the article pertains to human biology should be noted within the first paragraph. I see that you have reverted my edits. By doing this, you have removed altogether from the opening section the important information that this is about human biology. I think that my edit should stand.
I also think that the opening section would be more readable if it dispensed with the use of brackets.
My suggestion :
"The menstrual cycle is a regular natural change that occurs in the female reproductive system of humans and a few other mammals. It involves changes in the uterus and ovaries that make pregnancy possible."
With this edit, the details of which other animals have this process can be put later in the article, and the opening sentence does not have information in brackets, which is poor use of English. Boleslaw ( talk) 16:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Menstrual cycle. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Menstrual cycle. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:51, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Menstrual cycle. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.cks.nhs.uk/menopauseWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:44, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
I removed the following from the "Society and Culture/The Moon" section: "Other scholars counter, however, that the Dogon — unlike ancestral African hunter-gatherer populations — are polygamous, meaning that reproductive synchrony would not be expected on theoretical grounds. [1]"
I'm happy for this to go back in somewhere, but it's not at all an argument against the idea that the moon has no influence on the menstrual cycle in humans (the cited paper does not include the words "moon" or "lunar", and mostly seems to deal with "seasonal synchrony") and to therefore use it as a counter-argument in this exact context must be classed as original research at best. A better place for it would be the reproductive synchrony article - that concept includes (but is wider than) the idea of lunar influence, though that article does not currently include any claims of lunar influence on humans.
Loxlie ( talk) 20:48, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Menstrual cycle. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Seems like a glaring omission not to talk or even mention how women through the ages have delt with their monthly flow. I am aware there are several other pages that deal with this in depth, but i feel there need to be a short summary paragraph that LINKS IN with all/most of these other pages (rags/tampons/pads/cups/sponges)..... I am putting my hand up to write it. Cilstr ( talk) 13:08, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Is there any research supporting the notion of menses of females in groups converging ?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tumadoireach ( talk • contribs) 05:02, 17 March 2011
There are 4 phases of menstrual cycle which includes: (A)PROLIFERATIVE PHASE;This is also known as post menstrual phase,pre-ovulatory phase or proliferative phase. It starts on the 4th day after menstruation and continues upto the 14th day. It is characterised by mucous secretions and the body prepares itself for ovulation. The changes that occurs in this phase are controlled by hormone progesterone.
(b) SECRETORY PHASE:This is also known as post ovulatory or pre-menstrual phase. It takes place from the 15th day to the 28th day. Characterised by thickening of the endometrium,increased production of mucus,vascuralisation of thu uterine ligning and the body is ready for implantation of the fertilsed ova.
(C) MENSTRUAL PHASE: This is the last phase of menstrual cycle. It takes place after the ova has not been fertilised after a period of tim e. There is vasoconstriction of the blood vessels taking blood to the endometrium. This results in necrosis of the endometrium. The non-functional non vascuralised endometrium is shed off together with tfhe unfertilised ova as the menstrusl flow.
CONTENTS OF THE MENSTRUAL FLUID: It consists of; -Mucin. -Blood. -Debris of the endometrium. -Unfertilised ova. -Some lymphocytes.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.202.206.37 ( talk • contribs) 14:38, 23 January 2009
The title of the article doesn't say so, but this article seems to be only about the menstrual cycle in humans. I assume that the term doesn't actually refer only to humans. I'm not a biologist, so I'm probably not the right person to make the relevant edits, but I think this should be stated somewhere in the lead.-- 2605:E000:87C5:1200:5100:E718:46F8:B9AB ( talk) 02:45, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree that the opening of this article is insufficiently clear that it is mainly about humans. I tried to make a change to improve this but it was reverted. The details are here : Talk:Menstrual_cycle/Archive_2#Human_biology_and_biology_of_a_few_other_mammals Boleslaw ( talk) 02:29, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
I think we should rename this page Human reproductive cycle. The reason is the the menstrual cycle and the ovarian cycle, although concurrent, are treated in my sources as separate events. The move would allow these cycles to be described separately and will further distance this article form the more focussed Menstruation. Note that ovarian cycle back-links to this article. Graham Beards ( talk) 13:26, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi, User: Graham Beards. There's been comments (one from you too) implying that this article suffered partly or mostly because it only or mostly had men editing it. So if we throw around the word "sexism", I wouldn't say that only what I said counts as that, but I don't agree that highlighting the perspective women can bring to these pages and that men and women will often have a different perspective on a gendered topic (or other topic) is sexism. Wikipedia wants more women because they offer something different. Wikipedia says there's a gender bias because of that difference. If you look in the edit history of that page, even occasional editing tries to obscure information about the gender gap, but editors like User:Mx. Granger won't let it happen.
I am more than happy to let Tom (LT) speak for himself, but why do you keep implying that I don't know what the article is about when I do or that I'm not sticking to what the sources say when I am? The sources use the term "menstrual cycle." There are those that also use "human reproductive cycle", but they are often broader in scope and few of them exist. Since Google was invoked, I encourage editors to look at Google searches and see for themselves. See what terminology is actually being used (which terms are being used more often). For the few of them using "human reproductive cycle", it's not uncommon to see them talking about both the male and female reproductive systems, which we already have articles on.
For accuracy reasons, we can't get caught up in Google hits. They are misleading and, as a result, useless for this because there isn't much on the menstrual cycle when looking it up in scholarly searches under that term ("human reproductive cycle"). "Menstrual cycle", on the other hand, returns a lot more material and material that is actually focused on the topic. "Menstrual cycle" is specific and precise. It is more recognizable and allows readers to immediately know what the article is about.
You said "And Female reproductive system is an anatomy article." But then you pointed to the "Principles of Anatomy and Physiology" book, which goes to show that "menstrual cycle" is also an anatomy article in some regards. I think that both the anatomy and biology wikiprojects should be notified to discussions on this talk page so that they can help out. I don't think that we should defer to any one editor. We should be collaborating, which we are sort of doing already. LearnerB ( talk) 20:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
"Human reproductive cycle" is misleading and Googling phrases is not the way to go here, per WhatamIdoing and LearnerB. Crossroads -talk- 05:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I am also very sceptical of using Google as a tool. Graham, if I search for "Human reproductive cycle" without quotes, I get 141 million hits, which is similar to your 131 million, but in the top 10 results, only one ( this) mentioned "human reproductive cycle" in the result snippets, and indeed that article does discuss ovarian and menstrual cycles as separate things, but enjoys also being able to discuss them together. The problem is that without quotes, google is returning results for "human", "reproduction", and "cycles", though strongly preferring articles covering all three. But look at the result snippets and the words that it bolds: "menstrual cycle" is emboldened. That indicates Google has added a synonym to your search, and included "menstrual cycle". If I put quotes round the phrase "Human reproductive cycle", I get only 258 thousand results, vs 12 million for "menstrual cycle" in quotes. At a 50× level of difference in result numbers, we can be more confident which is the most important phrase. I think "menstrual cycle" is a more than frequent enough topic of discussion to deserve its own encyclopaedia article with that name. Clearly "ovarian cycle" is separate-but-linked and maybe deserves its own article too. I can see the attraction of discussing both together, or at least referring to the other while discussing one. But this isn't a strong enough case to eliminate "menstrual cycle" as an article topic. The textbook you cite, Principles of Anatomy and Physiology, calls the topic "The Female Reproductive Cycle", which is not the same as "Human reproductive cycle", and doesn't have the same ambiguity with the cycle-of-life that WAID mentions. -- Colin° Talk 10:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
This page has gotten really big. If you are struggling with finding the right spot to insert your comment, I recommend trying a new tool, especially if your name starts with "Sandy" and ends with "Georgia". Just click this: /info/en/?search=Talk:Menstrual_cycle?dtenable=1 and then see if you get [reply] buttons after each signature. Click one of those and see if you like the mini-editor.
This is a one-time secret code, so it will go away if you reload the page (click the "Talk" tab at the top) and won't appear on any other pages. Ping me (which is easy in the tool's visual mode) or stop by my talk page if you want to have this set up in your account for all talk pages. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 21:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I thought you all checked all these sources? Can I timestamp this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.94.99 ( talk) 19:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I think strictly, mathematically, speaking, the fact that a lunar cycle is 28 days, combined with this variable "science", logic dictates that there might be one (or realistically several) women that speak or read English have a cycle that closely mimics a lunar cycle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.94.99 ( talk) 19:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Strike all the illogical, erroneous moon-tales from this article. They are unsupported. The lunar phase of the urban legend even contradicts tales mentioned in one of the links mentioning moon-phases. The other moon-link is useless as well as it drops you at a search and not a specific reference.
You call this Space Age Medicine? Hmmmmppft 72.251.0.19 09:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.0.19 ( talk • contribs) 09:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Elettaria ( talk) 13:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Elettaria ( talk • contribs) 13:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
The medical consensus seem to be that it's just a coincidence. I'm removing the association made in the article.
http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/astro/astro2001/projects/luna/menstruation/mencycle.htm http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/2056/is-the-human-menstrual-cycle-related-to-the-lunar-cycle http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1348/whats-the-link-between-the-moon-and-menstruation Mihaiam ( talk) 20:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
"two become dominant (non-dominant" in the introduction this parenthesis is never closed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.177.174.137 ( talk) 19:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I just moved
The average age of menarche is about 12.5 years in the United States, [1] 12.72 in Canada, [2] 12.9 in the UK [3] and 13.06 ± 0.10 years in Iceland. [4]
from the lede to the first section of the article, because it is too detailed, in my opinion, for the lede. I actually think it's too detailed for this article and it belongs in Menarche where it is already covered, but will wait to see what others think. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 14:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
I have amended the last paragraph of the 'Luteal Phase' section, regarding hCG production, for greater accuracy. A small part of the article overall but as a lab medicine professional one I felt needed clarification! FlowersAndFilth ( talk) 13:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
I propose to add a short paragraph on the menstrual cycle in relation to the moon. It makes clear that while no statistical association between the moon and human menstruation has been documented in any extant population, this is not necessarily the end of the matter. From a deep-time evolutionary perspective, many reputable primatalogists and other scientists have considered the possibility that seasonal, tidal and other forms of synchrony may have had an adaptive basis in the past, just as they continue to have an adaptive basis among certain extant primate species. Altg20April2nd ( talk) 11:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Again, please read the literature. Menstrual cycles are not 28 days in length. Research has found over numerous studies that cycle are between 29 to 30 days on average. Please cite exactly which studies found 28 days.-- I am One of Many ( talk) 22:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Note: The above about 28 days is in response to this matter. Flyer22 ( talk) 22:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I suggest for now using [2] as a source. It states that the 28-day menstrual cycle is the "textbook" length but it is actually extremely variable. I would be happy to go with that. Are you able to download the article for free?-- I am One of Many ( talk) 23:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Flyer22: The idea that the human menstrual cycle is 28 days seems to be little more that a popular convention or myth, based on convenience in fitting to the modern western notion of a four-week calendrical month. The four-week month is artificial and has nothing to do with human evolution, being a recent calendrical invention. I know of no scientific statistical study or survey which has come up with the figure of 28 days for the human female menstrual cycle. Every study has come up with somewhere between 29.2 and 29.5 days. In younger women, during their most fertile years, the length tends to be closer to 29.5, while in later years it typically becomes shorter and shorter. It is mainly owing to the inclusion of short cycles (e.g. 27 days) in later years that studies often produce an average of somewhat less than 29.5 days. Many biologists would consider that what matters most in terms of human evolution and human nature is the length of the cycle during the most fertile years of life. This turns out to parallel quite closely the length of the synodic lunar cycle - 29.5 days. As for the idea of not using careful studies conducted a few decades ago, why not? As long as more recent studies are included as well, that's surely OK. I would query the idea that in recent years, the length of the human menstrual cycle has changed. I would be interested to know where this strange idea has come from? I know of no scientific study which would even concede that such a thing is possible. Individual cycle lengths are of course variable. Age at menarche is also culturally variable, being influenced by such factors as exposure to artificial light. But for the entire human species to change from one average cycle length to a shorter one within the course of a few decades would be genetically inexplicable, wouldn't it? Altg20April2nd ( talk) 14:48, 6 July 2013 (UTC) Altg20April2nd ( talk) 20:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment. While I don't mind the idea of describing the variability of the menstrual cycle in detail, I wish to caution editors about the use of the primary literature. It is not as simple as just picking and presenting a grand average. If you look very closely at the classic studies (e.g., Gunn et al., Chiazze et al.), you will notice that 1) the sample distributions in those studies are skewed and are never normal, i.e., bell-shaped curve, 2) there is a greater variability when the average is taken at 29 days and less variability when taken at 28 days, 3) the so called 28 day average is often the modal number and 4) other high quality and acceptable sources designate 28 days as the average. So presenting just one average number from a small set of studies without any context is very misleading and simplistic. Cherry picking a set of numbers, etc often leads to original research ( WP:OR) or POV pushing, which is against WP policy. Again, we should follow WP policy and stick primarily to mainstream secondary sources that are representative of the mainstream literature. danielkueh ( talk) 00:55, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I was a little surprised that in the very first paragraph, this article talks about the menstrual cycle as if it was some kind of dysfunction or disease, describing it in terms of "symptoms" that "interfere with normal life". The menstrual cycle isn't something that happens to women on certain days of the month (that would be menstruation itself); the existence of a menstrual cycle is "normal life" for women between puberty and menopause. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 00:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Note: Per this discussion at Talk:Estrous cycle, a class is currently working on this article. This is seen, for example, when it comes to edits by Smandalia ( talk · contribs) and Nisep ( talk · contribs). Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 23:09, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
AH2960, BF2510 and I would like to use the topic of Menstrual cycle effects on shopping, eating and mating habits. ( BD441 ( talk) 12:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)) BD441 ( talk) 12:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
AH2960 ( talk) 14:16, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
BF2510 ( talk) 15:22, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
BD441 ( talk) 16:23, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
We will be adding information about the effects of menstrual cycle length on sexual behaviour frequency in premenopausal women. (Cutler, Garcia and Kreiger, 1978). We will also add information about ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap dancers (Milly, Tybur, Jordan, 2007). We will also discuss the effects of menstrual cycle shifts on womens mate preferences and face perception (Penton-Voak et al 1999). ( Swifty1995 ( talk) 18:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC))
Feedback: Under the spending habits section, a sentence on why these differences in spending occur would be really interesting. Similarly, a sentence on why the products women buy change across the cycle would be useful to fully explain the topic. Rcuf235 ( talk) 10:09, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I have a few comments for improving this article for Human Sexuality. Firstly, this article is a featured articles, therefore it has been identified as one of the best articles produced by Wikipedia. Even so, it can still be improved. Firstly, you could possibly consider combining ‘Etymological’ and ‘The Mood’ in to one section. Under the ‘Work’ section, it may also be interesting to explain why the practice is controversial. Maybe explain the other side of the argument to ensure that it is not biased. I also copy-edited the section ‘Spending habits’. The sentence ‘women's product choice also differs across the menstrual cycle’, is unclear, as it sounds like it refers to sanitary products. I therefore changed this to ‘Women’s food and clothing choice also appears to differ across the menstrual cycle.' On a positive note, it is really interesting how it explains how the menstrual cycle can affect so many different disciplines, and it has been presented in an objective and unbiased way. Swifty1995 ( talk) 10:23, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review:
I think the article is great: really informative, well organised and quite interesting. My main suggestion would be to add some scientific research into why women's ability to work may or may not be impaired when menstruating. It would also be interesting to discuss, from an evolutionary point of view, changes in the duration of menstruation depending on the pheromones the woman menstruating is exposed to (e.g. there are studies that show that when exposed to higher levels of androgens than female hormones, the duration of menstruation shortens significantly). Really great article though, well done!! Robotsbackspaceraomeow ( talk) 21:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Overall, I think the new shopping habits section is an interesting addition to the page as it is something that has not been previously discussed in the article and it's beneficial to learn about how different behaviours change during a woman's cycle. The research used in this section has also been selected well as it is all highly relevant to the section. As well as this,you have used all the research appropriately as you simply just state the findings of the research and do not incorrectly interpret anything yourself from this research.
However I think the spending section could be improved slightly in several ways. Firstly, I think more research on the differences between pill users and non-pill users would be beneficial to add so it can been seen clearly whether there are differences in women's spending habits depending on whether they take the pill or not. I also think the section would be improved by adding explanations for why the changes in spending habits you have described occur across the menstrual cycle. Some explanations for why food choice and clothes choice differ within cycles would also be interesting to include. This would then mean that people can learn how spending habits, and food and clothes choice differ but would also be able to understand why these differences actually occur.
EmPhillips ( talk) 13:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
My main suggestions for improvement revolve around the structure of the article.
1. There are some repetitions in the article, the phrase “the average age of menarche is 12–15.They may occasionally start as early as eight, and this onset may still be normal. This first period often occurs later in the developing world than the developed world” appears twice, once in the introduction (it is worded just slightly differently here) and again in “Onset and frequency” section. The same is true for the phrase “length variation between eight and 20 days in a woman is considered as moderately irregular menstrual cycles Variation of 21 days or more is considered very irregular” being repeated in the “onset and frequency section”. I suggest you edit this so the phrases are no longer repeated.
2. I would suggest adding a citation to the phrase “The average age of menopause in women is 52 years, with anywhere between 45 and 55 being common” to make it more reliable.
3. You could create a separate section in “mood and behaviour” for how women’s behaviour and preference towards men changes, possibly including some information on how women’s cycle stages shape male mating behaviour.
4. As the “Work” section is pretty bare, you could note the Bristol company “coexist” is planning to create an official “period policy” designed to allow women (if needed) to take time off during their menstrual cycle.
Overall, I found this page to be very interesting and highly informative. All research and experimental findings are appropriate and relevant to the article. The “Society and culture” and “shopping habits” sections were a great addition, they prevent the article from being overly scientific.
Francesca alyse ( talk) 13:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Could remove the sentence that says " Alternatively, research has also been conducted on how the attractiveness of the female voice changes across the menstrual cycle." and instead go straight into explaining that this was found. Also, could explain what the pill is, maybe give its medical name for more clarity. Otherwise a really good section. Psundx ( talk) 14:43, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
As part of my university module, I have added the section 'Eating behaviour'. I would appreciate if people could have a look and give me any suggestions for improvement and/or feedback. Thanks! -- AH2960 ( talk) 12:14, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
The content below was added in these two difs; imported from this sandbox.
This content is sourced to a bunch of old primary sources as well as some popular press. Sourcing for this kind of content needs to follow WP:MEDRS. There is also some really dicey broad generalizations like the frst three sentences: "Behaviour towards potential mating partners changes during different phases in the cycle. Fertile woman show preference for males with good gene traits. (which is actually repeated)." and it goes on from there. This kind of biology-determining-behavior stuff is really dicey in general and needs to be handled with nuance, and very much sourced to reviews that are published high quality journals and textbooks to avoid the FRINGEy stuff that creeps into this.
Also this is a WP:FA and adding chunks of text like to FAs is not good; FAs need to be edited conservatively.
Behaviour towards potential mating partners changes during different phases in the cycle. [5] Fertile woman show preference for males with good gene traits. [6] [7] [8] Fertile woman show preference for males with good gene traits. [9] [10] Near ovulation women are found to have increased physical attraction and interest in attending social gatherings with men. [11] [12] When nearing ovulation in the cycle, women with partners experience more mate guarding (dependent on good gene indicators). [13] During the midcycle, increases in mate guarding has been found (for less attractive women). [14] [15] Pair bonded women report their partner as being more attentive when they are nearing ovulation. When fertility is low and on cycle days where progesterone is increased, women report high commitment to their current relationship. [16] On the other hand, during ovulation, women also report having more fantasies and sexual interest in non partners but not in their own partner. [17] [18] [19] They also feel more attraction to non partners when they are fertile as well as engaging in more extra-pair flirtation. [20] [21] [22] Women display a preference for extra pair copulation when they are in the fertile phase of the cycle, [23] despite this happiness in relationships does not change across the cycle. [24]
During the different phases of the menstrual, women's preferences for voice pitch changes. [25] Women seeking a short term mating partner, prefer a male with a low voice pitch, especially during the fertile phase of their cycle. [26] [27] Additionally, a preference for masculine male voices is found in women during the late follicular phase. [28] [29] [30] However, other research has found that only women with high pitched voices themselves found a more masculine voice attractive, and this was not related to which phase of the menstrual cycle she was in. [31] Alternatively, research has also been conducted on how the attractiveness of the female voice changes across the menstrual cycle. During their most fertile phase of the menstrual cycle, female’s voices are rated as significantly more attractive. This effect is not found with women on the pill. [32]
Women’s preference for male’s body odour changes across the menstrual cycle. [33] During the fertile phases of the menstrual cycle, males who score highly on a dominance scale are preferred by females. This effect however is dependent on relationship status, with single women the effect is less pronounced. [34] In regards to women's smell across the cycle, men have been found to use olfactory cues in order to know if a woman is ovulating. Men report rate women who are ovulating are rated as more attractive, by rating their odours. Men demonstrate preference for the scent of fertile women. [35] [36] Additionally, during their most fertile phase of the menstrual cycle women show preference for the odour of symmetrical men.This effect is not found for women on the pill. [37] [38]Not only do they demonstrate a preference for symmetrical men's scent but also, during the late follicular and ovulatory phases women prefer the scent of masculine men. [39] The scent of andostenone is highly preferred by women during the peak of their fertility in the menstrual cycle. [40] [41] Moreover, women demonstrate preference for men with a scent that indicates developmental stability. [42] [43]
Preferences for facial and bodily features in mates also change across the cycle. [44] [45]There has been no difference found in preference for long term mating partners during the menstrual cycle, however, those seeking a short term relationship were more likely to choose a partner with more masculine features than usual. [46] This was found to be the case especially during the woman’s high conception risk stage and when salivary testosterone was high. [47] [48] [49]However, when women are in the luteal (non fertile) phase, they prefer men (and females) with feminine faces. [50] [51] [52] A preference is also shown for self resembling faces and apparent health in faces during the luteal phase of the cycle. Apparent health preferences was found to be strongest when progesterone levels were high. [53] During the fertile phase of the cycle, women seeking a short term partner, seem to demonstrate a preference for taller and muscular males. [54] [55]As well as facial masculinity, women also show preferences of males with masculine bodies at peak fertility. [56] [57] [58]Mixed research has been found regarding facial and body symmetry preferences throughout different phases of the cycle. [59]
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite book}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
-- Jytdog ( talk) 23:06, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
This is about this series of diffs which did a bunch of complex things; the resulting content is below.
As with the section above, this paints way too broad a brush, and many of the sources are here are primary. for starters. This is an FA.
Research is emerging on how a woman's menstrual cycle impacts choices, and behaviours, in her life.
Economic spending patterns of women may change with the phase within their menstrual cycle. [1] One area of spending that has been found to be impacted is the control of spending across the phases. Among non-pill users the luteal phase corresponds to increased impulsivity in spending behaviour, which decreases during the follicular phase. [1]
Research into control of spending habits across the cycle observed a significant degree of variability with regard to bidding behaviour across the menstrual cycle within both pill users [2] as well as naturally cycling non-pill users. [3] One study examined self-control of spending across the cycle with regard to bidding behaviours. [3] It was found that when a woman experiences a natural cycle bids are significantly more, than the bids of men, across the whole cycle except for the ovulatory phase. [3] The research has produced mixed results with non-pill users demonstrating a flat pattern of bidding behaviour across the menstrual cycle. [2]
Research has also investigated how women's food and clothing choice also appears to differ across the menstrual cycle. A study found that food related consumption is greater than appearance related consumption in the luteal phase, where as in the fertile phase appearance related consumption is greater. [4] The fertile phase lead to a significant increase for sexy and attention grabbing items of clothing but does not significantly impact consumption of make-up related products. [4] It was additionally found that the hormonal changes that accompany the different phases of the menstrual cycle, specifically progesterone and oestrogen, have the same pattern as money spent on food related consumption and appearance related consumption respectively. [4]
The choices women make regarding attire have been found to differ according to their position within the menstrual cycle. [5] Women use their appearance in the same way a deer uses antlers for intra-sexual competition, rather than how a peacockuses his tail for courtship. [5] A pair of studies found that women are seen to prefer clothing that is more revealing and sexy when that are at peak fertility. [5] [6] This is demonstrated within hypothetical situations [6] as well as deliberate outfit choices. [5] Additionally such appearance enhancing behaviours are more prevalent when primed by attractive rivals. [5] One aspect of ornamentation difference around ovulation that has been found is the amount of skin that is shown, for example a skirt at high fertility where pants had been worn at low fertility. [7]
An increase in negative interpersonal relationships has been observed in women, especially during PMS, with an increase in undesirable social behaviour and increased passivity. [8] When PMS is experienced in the luteal phase an increase in negative interpersonal interactions has been observed.. [8] Some women have have been observed to decrease their social behaviours, becoming more withdrawn, during the luteal phase. [8] PMS symptomatology has been described by 60% of women in one study to include social problems, with a desire for an increase in time alone occurring during the luneal phase. [8]
References
-- Jytdog ( talk) 07:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
User:Morgangrizzle the content you want to add here doesn't comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you don't understand why, please ask. Thanks. Jytdog ( talk) 02:51, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
As per the advice to editors on the article page, I am indicating here that I have added the new women's health navbox template - see the Women's health project page which is being progressively added to women's health pages. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 17:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I have changed the opening paragraph to emphasise that the article is mainly about human biology, along with a small number of other mammals. It had not previously been clear in the opening of the article that the menstrual cycle mainly refers to human biology rather than to a wider group of animals. Boleslaw ( talk) 15:13, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
My edit of this article was to emphasise that this article is about human biology. I ensured that I did not cause the information about other animals to be repeated within the opening section. I moved this information to the opening paragraph, thus removing it from later in the opening section. My edit thus did not 'say this twice' in the opening section.
I think that the fact that the article pertains to human biology should be noted within the first paragraph. I see that you have reverted my edits. By doing this, you have removed altogether from the opening section the important information that this is about human biology. I think that my edit should stand.
I also think that the opening section would be more readable if it dispensed with the use of brackets.
My suggestion :
"The menstrual cycle is a regular natural change that occurs in the female reproductive system of humans and a few other mammals. It involves changes in the uterus and ovaries that make pregnancy possible."
With this edit, the details of which other animals have this process can be put later in the article, and the opening sentence does not have information in brackets, which is poor use of English. Boleslaw ( talk) 16:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Menstrual cycle. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Menstrual cycle. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:51, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Menstrual cycle. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.cks.nhs.uk/menopauseWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:44, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
I removed the following from the "Society and Culture/The Moon" section: "Other scholars counter, however, that the Dogon — unlike ancestral African hunter-gatherer populations — are polygamous, meaning that reproductive synchrony would not be expected on theoretical grounds. [1]"
I'm happy for this to go back in somewhere, but it's not at all an argument against the idea that the moon has no influence on the menstrual cycle in humans (the cited paper does not include the words "moon" or "lunar", and mostly seems to deal with "seasonal synchrony") and to therefore use it as a counter-argument in this exact context must be classed as original research at best. A better place for it would be the reproductive synchrony article - that concept includes (but is wider than) the idea of lunar influence, though that article does not currently include any claims of lunar influence on humans.
Loxlie ( talk) 20:48, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Menstrual cycle. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Seems like a glaring omission not to talk or even mention how women through the ages have delt with their monthly flow. I am aware there are several other pages that deal with this in depth, but i feel there need to be a short summary paragraph that LINKS IN with all/most of these other pages (rags/tampons/pads/cups/sponges)..... I am putting my hand up to write it. Cilstr ( talk) 13:08, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Is there any research supporting the notion of menses of females in groups converging ?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tumadoireach ( talk • contribs) 05:02, 17 March 2011
There are 4 phases of menstrual cycle which includes: (A)PROLIFERATIVE PHASE;This is also known as post menstrual phase,pre-ovulatory phase or proliferative phase. It starts on the 4th day after menstruation and continues upto the 14th day. It is characterised by mucous secretions and the body prepares itself for ovulation. The changes that occurs in this phase are controlled by hormone progesterone.
(b) SECRETORY PHASE:This is also known as post ovulatory or pre-menstrual phase. It takes place from the 15th day to the 28th day. Characterised by thickening of the endometrium,increased production of mucus,vascuralisation of thu uterine ligning and the body is ready for implantation of the fertilsed ova.
(C) MENSTRUAL PHASE: This is the last phase of menstrual cycle. It takes place after the ova has not been fertilised after a period of tim e. There is vasoconstriction of the blood vessels taking blood to the endometrium. This results in necrosis of the endometrium. The non-functional non vascuralised endometrium is shed off together with tfhe unfertilised ova as the menstrusl flow.
CONTENTS OF THE MENSTRUAL FLUID: It consists of; -Mucin. -Blood. -Debris of the endometrium. -Unfertilised ova. -Some lymphocytes.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.202.206.37 ( talk • contribs) 14:38, 23 January 2009
The title of the article doesn't say so, but this article seems to be only about the menstrual cycle in humans. I assume that the term doesn't actually refer only to humans. I'm not a biologist, so I'm probably not the right person to make the relevant edits, but I think this should be stated somewhere in the lead.-- 2605:E000:87C5:1200:5100:E718:46F8:B9AB ( talk) 02:45, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree that the opening of this article is insufficiently clear that it is mainly about humans. I tried to make a change to improve this but it was reverted. The details are here : Talk:Menstrual_cycle/Archive_2#Human_biology_and_biology_of_a_few_other_mammals Boleslaw ( talk) 02:29, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
I think we should rename this page Human reproductive cycle. The reason is the the menstrual cycle and the ovarian cycle, although concurrent, are treated in my sources as separate events. The move would allow these cycles to be described separately and will further distance this article form the more focussed Menstruation. Note that ovarian cycle back-links to this article. Graham Beards ( talk) 13:26, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi, User: Graham Beards. There's been comments (one from you too) implying that this article suffered partly or mostly because it only or mostly had men editing it. So if we throw around the word "sexism", I wouldn't say that only what I said counts as that, but I don't agree that highlighting the perspective women can bring to these pages and that men and women will often have a different perspective on a gendered topic (or other topic) is sexism. Wikipedia wants more women because they offer something different. Wikipedia says there's a gender bias because of that difference. If you look in the edit history of that page, even occasional editing tries to obscure information about the gender gap, but editors like User:Mx. Granger won't let it happen.
I am more than happy to let Tom (LT) speak for himself, but why do you keep implying that I don't know what the article is about when I do or that I'm not sticking to what the sources say when I am? The sources use the term "menstrual cycle." There are those that also use "human reproductive cycle", but they are often broader in scope and few of them exist. Since Google was invoked, I encourage editors to look at Google searches and see for themselves. See what terminology is actually being used (which terms are being used more often). For the few of them using "human reproductive cycle", it's not uncommon to see them talking about both the male and female reproductive systems, which we already have articles on.
For accuracy reasons, we can't get caught up in Google hits. They are misleading and, as a result, useless for this because there isn't much on the menstrual cycle when looking it up in scholarly searches under that term ("human reproductive cycle"). "Menstrual cycle", on the other hand, returns a lot more material and material that is actually focused on the topic. "Menstrual cycle" is specific and precise. It is more recognizable and allows readers to immediately know what the article is about.
You said "And Female reproductive system is an anatomy article." But then you pointed to the "Principles of Anatomy and Physiology" book, which goes to show that "menstrual cycle" is also an anatomy article in some regards. I think that both the anatomy and biology wikiprojects should be notified to discussions on this talk page so that they can help out. I don't think that we should defer to any one editor. We should be collaborating, which we are sort of doing already. LearnerB ( talk) 20:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
"Human reproductive cycle" is misleading and Googling phrases is not the way to go here, per WhatamIdoing and LearnerB. Crossroads -talk- 05:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I am also very sceptical of using Google as a tool. Graham, if I search for "Human reproductive cycle" without quotes, I get 141 million hits, which is similar to your 131 million, but in the top 10 results, only one ( this) mentioned "human reproductive cycle" in the result snippets, and indeed that article does discuss ovarian and menstrual cycles as separate things, but enjoys also being able to discuss them together. The problem is that without quotes, google is returning results for "human", "reproduction", and "cycles", though strongly preferring articles covering all three. But look at the result snippets and the words that it bolds: "menstrual cycle" is emboldened. That indicates Google has added a synonym to your search, and included "menstrual cycle". If I put quotes round the phrase "Human reproductive cycle", I get only 258 thousand results, vs 12 million for "menstrual cycle" in quotes. At a 50× level of difference in result numbers, we can be more confident which is the most important phrase. I think "menstrual cycle" is a more than frequent enough topic of discussion to deserve its own encyclopaedia article with that name. Clearly "ovarian cycle" is separate-but-linked and maybe deserves its own article too. I can see the attraction of discussing both together, or at least referring to the other while discussing one. But this isn't a strong enough case to eliminate "menstrual cycle" as an article topic. The textbook you cite, Principles of Anatomy and Physiology, calls the topic "The Female Reproductive Cycle", which is not the same as "Human reproductive cycle", and doesn't have the same ambiguity with the cycle-of-life that WAID mentions. -- Colin° Talk 10:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
This page has gotten really big. If you are struggling with finding the right spot to insert your comment, I recommend trying a new tool, especially if your name starts with "Sandy" and ends with "Georgia". Just click this: /info/en/?search=Talk:Menstrual_cycle?dtenable=1 and then see if you get [reply] buttons after each signature. Click one of those and see if you like the mini-editor.
This is a one-time secret code, so it will go away if you reload the page (click the "Talk" tab at the top) and won't appear on any other pages. Ping me (which is easy in the tool's visual mode) or stop by my talk page if you want to have this set up in your account for all talk pages. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 21:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)