Susan's Place Logo

News:

Based on internal web log processing I show 3,417,511 Users made 5,324,115 Visits Accounting for 199,729,420 pageviews and 8.954.49 TB of data transfer for 2017, all on a little over $2,000 per month.

Help support this website by Donating or Subscribing! (Updated)

Main Menu

Doing research on intersexed female

Started by glaze, September 10, 2011, 12:06:56 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

glaze

I'm doing looking up on genetic girls with intersexed complications that masculinize their external appearance for a friend of mine. Is there such a condition? For males there are XXY that feminize them. The one I know is Tuner but the complications that comes out of that sound to be very visible and I don't think it masculinizes them that much actually. Please enlighten me so I may not be so ignorant  :D
  •  

Annah

Intersex conditions and physical appearance varies from person to person. There are some intersex girls who look and function just like their gender and then there are some who are between.  Also, girls suffer from the chromosome disorder just as guys do.

Go to this link. It will help you out.

http://www.isna.org/
  •  

Zelane

Also remember that PCOS (Polycystic ovary syndrome) could induce a surge in testosterone thus creating masculinization.
  •  

pebbles

this will be important for what I will explain.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/Steroidogenesis.svg
Think of hormone biosynthsis as a river starting with the source Colesterol flowing downstream the river with the primary flow breaking off into ever smaller tributaries as each byproduct is gradually broken down.

============
As has been mentioned Poly Cycstic Ovaries can cause unwanted masculinisation however it's not really an intersex disorder.

in the female menstral cycle a folical or lump containing an egg forms on the ovary releasing Progesterone. this lump dissapears normally when the ovum is released but if the ovum cannot be released the folicals will accumilate giving the apperance of cysts that release a hell of alot of progestersone.

Excess progesterone is converted into Testosersone increasing the flow downstream of the biosynthsis pathway Causing masculinisation.
======

Another condition that exsists is Congenital Adrenial Hyperplasia it is an intersex disorder in XX individuals.
Refer to the above chart.

In this disorder the Gene that encodes for the Enzyme. 11-Beta Hydroxylase see it in the minerocordicloids normally produced in the Adrenal glands to the upper right of the image when this happens their cannot be any "flow" from the Progesterone class of hormones into the minerocorciloids. This causes the depletion of those hormones, Cortisol, and Aldosterone. and the resultant precursors are shunted down the androgen pathway instead.

This happens developmentally causing masculinisation to varying extents of the external genitalia.

There are other intersex disorders mentioned.
La Chapelle Syndrome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome

This is where an indivdual who is XX recives the SRY gene whitch is the "male factor" gene it gets stuck on the X chromosome by way of a mistaken crossover event... The X and the Y arn't supposed to crossover during meosis but because they are historically the same chromosome it can happen.
  •  

Annah

If research is on a college lvl, approach your professor first before citing resources from the Wikipedia. Many professors do not allow Wikipedia to be used as a source as anyone can contribute to the discussion and it is not as refrained in a typical scholarly article or research.
  •  

pebbles

Quote from: Annah on September 13, 2011, 09:10:29 AM
If research is on a college lvl, approach your professor first before citing resources from the Wikipedia. Many professors do not allow Wikipedia to be used as a source as anyone can contribute to the discussion and it is not as refrained in a typical scholarly article or research.
what you do is cite the sources that wikipedia cites. I did that for most of my degree level essays.
  •  

Cindy

Oh dear,

As a Prof. it is one, of many things I check, I would fail you. Prove to me that you had read and understood the mentioned references. And give YOUR opinion and interpretation. otherwise it is totally worthless. Taking a ref from a review is totally wrong and inadequate. Very lazy and will catch you out.

As far as I'm concerned Wikipedia is not a reference source it is an encyclopaedia. You do not quote encyclopaedia's as references or as a source of them. That is poor study. Sorry. 
Cindy
  •  

Annah

Quote from: pebbles on September 14, 2011, 05:56:35 AM
what you do is cite the sources that Wikipedia cites. I did that for most of my degree level essays.

What our professors would say to that is "Well, go to those sources they cited and read it and cite information from that source and don't use Wikipedia even as a secondary source from the primary source." Because anyone can type anything on Wikipedia and put a source behind it.

If we were to use Wikipedia as a source or even as a source to a source, our professors would hand us our papers back and tell us to rewrite it with appropriate sources.
  •  

pebbles

Quote from: Annah on September 14, 2011, 09:26:48 AM
What our professors would say to that is "Well, go to those sources they cited and read it and cite information from that source and don't use Wikipedia even as a secondary source from the primary source." Because anyone can type anything on Wikipedia and put a source behind it.

If we were to use Wikipedia as a source or even as a source to a source, our professors would hand us our papers back and tell us to rewrite it with appropriate sources.
Yeah they could but they don't simple point is dispite elitism about it wikipedia is extremely accurate. inaccuracies in wikipedia are found usually around controversal subjects complex biological issues no.
  •  

Cindy

Pebbles,
The problem is that the student has not done the work. They have taken the belief from a none refereed site that the information is correct. That is appalling studentship. Wiki and its likes have a place, they act as a starting point some times for work or concepts you are unaware of. But once you start to discuss and apply those concepts they have to come from primary sources.  Believe it or not I have read 99% of the papers that my students will end up quoting. I know when the haven't read them and just quote them. It is a lying. Once a potential academic begins to lie all warning bells start to sound.

Annah,  I realise from many of your posts that you are 'the real deal' and that you comment was just that. I give one warning. I fail the student the second time.

The strangest case I have had was for an Honours student project. I had a few potential applicants so I told them to write a one page review of the project I had defined. One student produced a one page version of a review, plagiarised word for word, that  I had published. She even got upset when I told her about it.

Honesty in academia is paramount, and I think you will find your Profs will be very harsh on people straying from that.

Incidentally we now have soft ware that will scan a students paper and match sentences against published articles.

Big Sister is after you.

Work Hard and enjoy.
I and all your Profs do know how hard it is.

And if you are not sure ASK US. I'd much longer spend a day or weeks explaining concepts to a student than failing them.

Hugs

Cindy 

  •  

glaze

It is not for a college "research" just a personal one. Reading through the materials, very informative. Thanks!  :)
  •  

Annah

Quote from: pebbles on September 16, 2011, 01:59:16 AM
Yeah they could but they don't simple point is dispite elitism about it wikipedia is extremely accurate. inaccuracies in wikipedia are found usually around controversal subjects complex biological issues no.

Ive seen about quite a bit of Wikipedia sources that were very inaccurate. Matter of fact i found two mistakes two days ago regarding "Salem Witch Trials" and "The Great Crusades." Both articles had notable inaccuracies and misspellings. I usually catch about 40% of all Wikipedia articles that I am intimately knowledgeable in to be inaccurate in some areas.

Wikipedia is best for general knowledge if you want to know something "on the go" but for writing a paper on an academic level, it's a no no. To the original poster, it's best to ask your professor before citing Wikipedia to see where their stand is. I know at my undergrad, grad, and certainly post grad schools they did not allow it. It really had nothing to do with elitism.
  •  

Annah

Quote from: Cindy James on September 16, 2011, 02:57:39 AM

Annah,  I realise from many of your posts that you are 'the real deal' and that you comment was just that. I give one warning. I fail the student the second time.

The strangest case I have had was for an Honours student project. I had a few potential applicants so I told them to write a one page review of the project I had defined. One student produced a one page version of a review, plagiarised word for word, that  I had published. She even got upset when I told her about it.


Our school is similar. If a student plagiarizes they are sent before a hearing committee. The student either is removed from the school or they are placed on probation for one calender year where they cannot receive scholarships, grants, etc.

Our school uses similar technology to search for plagiarism.
  •  

Gabby

Quote from: Annah on September 16, 2011, 09:45:24 AM
Ive seen about quite a bit of Wikipedia sources that were very inaccurate. Matter of fact i found two mistakes two days ago regarding "Salem Witch Trials" and "The Great Crusades." Both articles had notable inaccuracies and misspellings. I usually catch about 40% of all Wikipedia articles that I am intimately knowledgeable in to be inaccurate in some areas.
Hermeneutics, everything is interpretation, there's no definitive one source from which to go too, as much as we might like that to be the case.  Seeing situations from many different perspectives we can get closer to the truth.  Which is why even arriving at a great truth may lead us to an even darker place, zealotry of any kind in any walk of life is always bad.

Quote from: Annah on September 16, 2011, 09:45:24 AM
Wikipedia is best for general knowledge if you want to know something "on the go" but for writing a paper on an academic level, it's a no no. To the original poster, it's best to ask your professor before citing Wikipedia to see where their stand is. I know at my undergrad, grad, and certainly post grad schools they did not allow it. It really had nothing to do with elitism.
In writing a paper is best to tailor it to the marker, research an area the marker finds interesting show you understand their ideas, expand on those ideas.  What I told my niece when she first went to university was:  "Give them what they want."  Now she's on target for a 1st (UK university).  Why argue, create a dialogue instead.  I really should listen to my own advice haha.
  •  

Annah

Quote from: Adrienne on September 17, 2011, 08:56:02 AM
Hermeneutics, everything is interpretation, there's no definitive one source from which to go too, as much as we might like that to be the case.  Seeing situations from many different perspectives we can get closer to the truth.  Which is why even arriving at a great truth may lead us to an even darker place, zealotry of any kind in any walk of life is always bad.
In writing a paper is best to tailor it to the marker, research an area the marker finds interesting show you understand their ideas, expand on those ideas.  What I told my niece when she first went to university was:  "Give them what they want."  Now she's on target for a 1st (UK university).  Why argue, create a dialogue instead.  I really should listen to my own advice haha.

There is a considerable difference between a hermeneutic and an exegetical approach to interpretation and inaccurately stating facts.

For example, if a site said "Alexander the Great was responsible for the burning of Rome and participated with the Goths in the sacking of it's capital empire" that is not a hermeneutic difference of interpretation. It is factual error.

To say "The Persians led their peoples in splendor and glory and was very generous to their captives and afforded the defeated every right to lands as the conqueror" then that would be a hermeneutic interpretation because this statement would vary greatly between the people who experienced it, the victims, the victors, and or the outside world during or after the events.

And what I mean, is that Wikipedia can be subjected to factual errors as it is open to anyone to edit any article without moderation. In an academic circle, this is not a good idea to use as a source of information. Traditionally, reading sources from a series of scholars who invested time, had their works published, and spent the majority of their professional lives to put their work on paper for you to use as a reference is much more useful than using information from a person who posted in entry in Wikipedia under the dark ages because he just saw an episode of it on TV.
  •  

Jamie D

QuoteHonesty in academia is paramount

Truer words have not been spoken.
Now let's apply this to "climate change" research.
  •  

Annah

Quote from: Jamie D on February 14, 2012, 05:02:48 AM
Truer words have not been spoken.
Now let's apply this to "climate change" research.

That's one helluva thread bump, Jamie :)

Five months.
  •  

Jamie D

Quote from: Annah on February 14, 2012, 07:57:53 AM
That's one helluva thread bump, Jamie :)

Five months.

You can't keep a good thread down!
  •