Talk:5α-Reductase 2 deficiency

New Chapter Layout?

It's easy to just edit, but maybe we can discuss on the layout of chapters in this wiki. For instance, we can combine Gender, 5-ARD in non-western culture and In popular culture to a major chapter "social interactions" or "social characteristics" or something like that. I think it can improve efficiency for reading the page. Chbse

2 redirects

Redirect from "Guevedoche" should really be "Guevedoce" - the former is either a misspelling or is quite rare.

I'd like to propose as well adding a redirect from "Penis-At-12"/"Penis-At-Twelve" - which is a common translation and often-used title for this phenomenon.

5-AR type I deficiency?

Does 5-AR type I deficiency also cause genitals to not develop normally? Or is only 5-AR type II responsible for penis growtH?

"DHT insensitivity syndrome" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect DHT insensitivity syndrome has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 30 § DHT insensitivity syndrome until a consensus is reached. (t · c) buidhe 14:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Individuals or males

As someone who has never heard of this condition before, can someone explain why the Hell people keep suddenly changing "individuals" to "males" lately? Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 14:10, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Because it only affects genetic males. Hope this helps Equivamp - talk 14:12, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm aware, but it's not like being an "individual" and "male" are mutually exclusive, so it feels like a huge waste of time for them. Is this just a transphobic thing going on or what? Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 14:17, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I can't speak for other editors (of which I was unaware until you created this section), but for myself, no. And I don't appreciate the aspersion. Equivamp - talk 14:20, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Apologies. There are 3 random IPs without any context changing individuals to males with some transphobic vibes imo. And when I say that, I mean they change every single use of "individual" to male. You only changed the first mention for clarification which makes perfect sense and was good. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 14:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

The following sentence was added to the article lead in January 2022: [1] The condition is rare, only affects genetic males, and has a broad spectrum of presentations most apparent in the genitalia. Since then, some form of the term "genetic male" has been present in the intro.

In March, this language was changed by Tinm to read: [2] This deficiency causes atypical sex development in individuals that have an XY caryotype. [sic]

A previous RFC on this page found consensus that it is appropriate to frame the article in terms of genetic males -vs- phenotypical (or similar language) males. Removing all uses of the term "genetic male" from the article would seem to go against this previous consensus. I have therefore restored language similar to January 2022 to the intro.

As a nitpick, I also don't think it is completely accurate to use "individuals with an XY karotype" as a replacement for "genetic males". Individuals with conditions like XXY syndrome, XYY syndrome, and XXXY syndrome are also considered "genetic males", but they do not have the 46,XY karyotype. Based on my understanding of 5-ARD, there is nothing that would theoretically prevent people with XXY, XYY, XXXY from having this condition as well - although I'm not aware of any case studies demonstrating this. Astaire (talk) 17:22, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

I indeed started the recent series of edits so I'll chime in briefly. I wasn't aware of the earlier discussion, and I don't really care about the wording as long as it is clear, neutral and biologically accurate. I will say though, that I do not believe this page is the right place to take decisions about vocabulary ; arguably this article should simply follow the conventions used at Disorders of sex development.

Anyway, before my edits the page read "People with this condition are genetically male, with one X and one Y chromosome in each cell" ; this was utterly confusing and just plain wrong. Strictly speaking the condition, 5α-Reductase deficiency, can be present in both genetic males and genetic females, however since female development has little need for this gene there is little effect when it's not there. Conversely, the gene being important for testosterone metabolism, a deficiency has large effects in 46XY individuals (or hypothetically whenever the male determination gene SRY is expressed). Where I'm going is, a similar but correct sentence would be "People who get diagnosed with this condition are genetically male" (as in: the condition is only relevant in 46XY individuals so 46XX individuals do not get diagnosed). I'm quite certain that this goes much beyond the information that the user(s) who wrote this sentence wanted to convey, more likely the sentence was just clumsy. Regarless, it needed to be re-writen and the important information is "this deficiency alters sex development in 46XY individuals".

As for "genetic male" vs "individuals with an XY karyotype" AFAIK the phrase "genetic male" is mostly used for convenience and there is no unified definition. In any case, for the sake of readability of the article by the general public the article should explain or define what a genetic male is, so the "XY karyotype" or similar wording will be there anyway. And then we may as well not start introducing confusing and potentially controversial phrases.

Also, the article does not need to go into the possibility of multiple compound DSD factors (even the main article on DSDs currently doesn't bring up this topic)... let alone the short description. Therefore it is absolutely fine to primarily discuss the 46XY karyotype.

~ Tinm (talk) 13:56, 4 April 2025 (UTC)