Talk:Equestrian perniosis

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Dermatology task force.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Article categorization

This article was initially categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Women equestrians

Myoglobin had removed the gender specifier from the description of the condition, with the edit summary: not sure how gender would modulate this; WP:being bold and removing until someone can explain why/if there is a difference. While I have no explanation to offer, the description is right from the cited source, Andrews' Diseases of the Skin: Clinical Dermatology, which even in the current edition (12th, 2015) states (page 22):

Chilblains occur chiefly on the hands, feet, ears, and face, especially in children; onset is enhanced by dampness. [...] The lateral thighs are involved in women equestrians who ride on cold, damp days and the hips in those wearing tight-fitting jeans with a low waistband.

Perhaps the upcoming 13th edition will revisit that passage, but for now that's what we have to go on. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 04:22, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that they don't explain any hypothetical mechanism of action for a sex-based effect, I assume the author is just referring to a greater prevalence of equestrians who are women. For example, consider that some men may also wear tight-fitting jeans, and could conceivably develop the same condition if they went riding. Unless a MoA is explained I think we can't just assume this only affects one sex. As for this appearing in the current text, that's probably just copy/paste on their part :) Myoglobin (talk) 12:19, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Myoglobin: Fair enough, I certainly don't feel that the text needs to invoke gender. My only concern was avoiding potential WP:OR, given that we're deviating from the (only) cited source. It'd certainly be preferable to have a second source which describes the condition without invoking gender. But even absent that, it seems reasonable to read the Andrews' mention of "women" as merely an anecdotal/editorial flourish, rather than something integral to the definition. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 13:55, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]