Female athletes and testosterone

Just popping this on. It need to be read far and wide.

thecritic.co.uk/every-sport-is-male-sport/

All these mediocre males becoming elite female athletes. I expect an ex-junior male cycling champion who no longer qualified into the male GB cycling team will be joining this list next year.

So, a male didn’t reach the cut for the male team but will no doubt make the female GB cycling team and there will go a GB female’s chances of representing her country. Despite that male having benefited not only from male puberty and all the skeletal, muscular, cardiovascular, etc benefits, but maybe even better coaching opportunities since starting cycling. Oh… and never having to cope with menstrual issues in training or competing, nor ever worry about pregnancy.

But … there you go.

There’s a relevant paragraph in the Helen Joyce article in the MoS in another thread. The advancement of gay rights in the 1980/90s demanded nothing from the wider public other than acceptance, trans ideology demands something else.

“But I believe trans ideology will only encourage hostility.
For example, the more males who compete in women’s sports, the more obvious the unfairness. Silencing objectors will not change their minds – it will, I’m convinced, make them angrier, because something they genuinely value is being taken away.”

Reducing testosterone to 5 nanomoles is no compromise at all. There is no pill that makes a man a woman just as there is no pill that turns night into day.

Hellofabore--No, thank you, for the amount of time and energy you've put into this thread.

Aparallaxia

That is it. Thank you.

Hellofabore--the link to the BJSM was broken. Is this it?

bjsm.bmj.com/content/54/10/599

PennineSpring

"The pushback is building. How do you negotiate a way out whilst saving face?"

I believe that the IOC/WA, by reducing the T levels to 5 from 10 and then barring some athletes from competing in a range of athletics events (400m to 1 mile) would be a compromise which would be accepted.
How wrong they were, they are still woefully missing the point (deliberately?), that males have innate advantages over females when it comes to physical sport,advantages which do not change simply by lowering T levels.
Our line in the sand is - no XY athletes in women's XX sport.
Their line in the sand is unclear and smudged and basically amounts to - why can't you be nicer and more accomodating?

Yes Joanna Harper does agree with their findings. However, in their Woman's Hour interview they spent the time trying to minimise their own findings. It would be a lot more honest if they had held up their hands and admitted that their original study was total nonsense.

And to Joanna Harper's credit, they've done that. They're honest about what the science is saying, and have put out a review concurring with Hilton + Lundberg's.

It does mean that Harper is now reduced to making philosophical arguments about what level of performance difference can be accepted as "fair", because Harper is very committed to trans inclusion, but that is at least not denying the scientific evidence and insisting black is white.

Completely agree.

If you work in science then it won't be long before you come up against results of your own you don't like, that don't support your hypothesis, that contradict something you thought was true, or work by others that flat out seems to disagree with your own last few years hard work and results. You can't just decide your fellow scientists are lying or that your results are rubbish. You have to engage with those results and how you or others came by them to try to understand what's going on. Sometimes you have to change your views based on the evidence. You can't go in there trying to prove a result you want to be true and then refuse to accept the result if it's not what you want..

And to Joanna Harper's credit, they've done that. They're honest about what the science is saying, and have put out a review concurring with Hilton + Lundberg's.

It does mean that Harper is now reduced to making philosophical arguments about what level of performance difference can be accepted as "fair", because Harper is very committed to trans inclusion, but that is at least not denying the scientific evidence and insisting black is white.

Something I'm struggling with is people claiming the science is wrong and that the researchers (or at least the female ones, for some reason) have an agenda that they're pushing via the science, and then not actually engaging with the science to show why they think it's wrong.

If you work in science then it won't be long before you come up against results of your own you don't like, that don't support your hypothesis, that contradict something you thought was true, or work by others that flat out seems to disagree with your own last few years hard work and results. You can't just decide your fellow scientists are lying or that your results are rubbish. You have to engage with those results and how you or others came by them to try to understand what's going on. Sometimes you have to change your views based on the evidence. You can't go in there trying to prove a result you want to be true and then refuse to accept the result if it's not what you want..

Cyclingmum50, if you want to say you think the scientists are all wrong just because you don't like their results then that's up to you, it doesn't change the reality or validity of those results, but don't try to claim the science is wrong and then not back that up with substance.

I believe there’s too much at stake for some people to admit they’re wrong, to admit black is not white, boys have performance advantage over biological girls. After all, when you’ve currently got the IOC and other NGB’s subscribing to this nonsense, why wouldn’t you dig in and take personal advantage of the rules.
But the emperor has no clothes, people have eyes, and as the Hubbard case has shown recently, worldwide public opinion does not agree with current IOC policy
If I had a personal stake in this I’d be thinking long and hard about the next 12 months. The IOC is under so much pressure to change policy and once they go, all the NGB’s will go too.
The pushback is building. How do you negotiate a way out whilst saving face?

It would be sad to think that someone would come onto a thread with the objective of aiming the pointy finger of shame at us for having the conversation.

Or that if they had compelling evidence that would change our minds that they would keep it to themselves.

But maybe not acknowledging the evidence helps them to support someone that they love participate in the female category when the evidence is clear that this is unfair, whatever the skill level, if it is not a mixed sex competition.

TurquoiseBaubles
GonadTheGaul
Helleofabore
PennineSpring

Thanks for all those detailed posts, which contain all the relevant information and more. Sadly, I think it will be ignored by those who are not prepared to provide their own "evidence" as a counterpoint.
There is no biological and ethical evidence to the contrary. The IOC/WA and other sporting institutions have allowed themselves to be influenced by lobbying groups with an agenda, rather than scientists and biologists.

Yes I'm looking forward to seeing the science too, or at least a reasoned critical review of the papers cyclingmum50 disagrees with.

And you have previously posted:

"Interesting studies" that do not include trans women, usually compare customers men with CIS woman. And usually by a particular biologist who isn't even able to fill in a conflict of interest statement correctly. Doesn't seem very "credible" to me. That might be why those where "credibility" IS really key skip over their submissions. Lobbying. Bullying. Let's you so far. But good, ethical people are able to see through the hate and bs. And that's really great

And been proven false on the "Interesting studies" that do not include trans women, usually compare customers men with CIS woman statement.

Yet continue with the Doesn't seem very "credible" to me. when the study from the 'particular biologist' has been back up with similar conclusions from a transwoman doing a similar review... so, what is that about 'credibility' ...

That might be why those where "credibility" IS really key skip over their submissions. Lobbying. Bullying. Let's you so far. But good, ethical people are able to see through the hate and bs. And that's really great

mmm.. is this a reverse?

Because the only problematic 'lobbying' I see is from people using false conclusions to push through their agenda. Even Harper is very unconvinced that Hubbard is competing 'fairly' and Harper damn well advised the IOC committee!!!

Bullying.... like the bullying you perpetuate by denouncing the results from Dr Emma Hilton. Do you denounce all the studies done by the Karolinska Institute too that Tommy Lundberg belongs to?

But good, ethical people are able to see through the hate and bs.

You post an article in defence of females with high testosterone.... We know from evidence from the WA case that Caster Semenya has a particular DSD, it is not hard to find, it may have not been meant for public release but it was and that is out there. So, 'ethical' is certainly NOT a word I would use to describe this article with its twisting and turning.

So, I DO look forward to the evidence that you do believe conveys the truth. Please link it up and we are ready to read it .

Sorry...

So..... now they are being more honest...

should be

So..... now they are being more honest... I think they know a great deal more than they are saying. These are all DSD athletes and they are drawing the comparison directly.

From Cyclingmum's article.

A second test to determine their testosterone levels was recently done in Rome where the athletes are presently based while setting Europe alight.

And yet we know from people who have studied these regulations, including Ross Tucker who was heavily involve with Caster Semenya, that no 'second' test would be done if these athletes were in fact XX. So, who are you going to believe is purely up to you. A person that is heavily invested in having these athletes compete where the DSDs these athletes are not released to protect their privacy, or professionals with nothing to gain from it.

The star sprinters became the latest African female athletes to be marginalised by World Athletics' controversial rules, which have disqualified South Africa's Caster Semenya, Burundi's Francine Niyonsaba, and Kenya's Margaret Wambui from defending their 800m Olympic medals.

So..... now they are being more honest...

Nigerien sprinter Aminatou Seyni has also been barred from running in her favoured 400 m in Japan, and will have to make do with the 200 m race, like the Namibian duo.

Aminatou Seyni, is also an athlete with a DSD.

www.smh.com.au/sport/dsd-athlete-seyni-banned-from-400m-20191001-p52wq1.html

Namibia will look to ally with nations whose athletes have been marginalised by WA on similar grounds to contest the ban, Xoagub said.

Well, this is great news. Maybe this will force a complete and comprehensive study to be conducted independently of course, that will then remove these ridiculous differences between events. And duplicate the study with transgender athletes, too. Maybe, just maybe, it will also make the move much more fair to females.

Last week Wednesday, she blazed to victory at the Irena Szewińska Memorial meeting in Bydgoszcz, Poland, beating the current European champion Justyna Święty-Ersetic of Poland, who finished second more than 20 m behind.

With that outstanding run, Mboma also set a new u20 world record, African record, national record, meeting record, and personal best and world-leading time

Let's hope that world record will be contested now.

It remains unclear whether high testosterone levels give athletes a competitive edge, despite WA's policy.

Err.... no, it doesn't remain unclear. It has been proven. In fact, here is a study. But, we don't need the study.... in females it is called 'doping' to increase their testosterone.

news.ki.se/increased-performance-in-female-athletes-after-testosterone-supplementation

(here is the study bjsm.bmj.com/content/54/10/599)

The flourishing 800-metre career of Annet Negesa from Uganda was cut short due to WA's intrusive measures.

In an interview with the New York Times in 2019, she claims to have been advised by WA to undergo irreversible surgery because of her naturally elevated testosterone levels.

Negesa's career has never been the same and she subsequently quit.

The treatment of Annet was devastatingly cruel. However, the surgery they had was orchiectomy (removal of internal testes).

www.hrw.org/report/2020/12/04/theyre-chasing-us-away-sport/human-rights-violations-sex-testing-elite-women

I think it is likely that these athletes have been sold a dream that cannot be delivered on. It is abhorrent if they found out about their DSDs this way and the health services in those countries obviously need a great deal of improvement. But they the OIC has allowed this half way measure and it should not.

However, cyclingmum, I think we can reasonably say that the NNOC president, Abner Xoagub, actually knows the reasons why these athletes have been excluded. I think that the journalist Sheefeni Nikodemus knows the truth too.

As I said, it is up to you who you believe. But I would probably want to have better source material.

This also confirms that biologically female athletes can have high levels of testosterone

It does no such thing. At all. In fact, by reading this article you are left with the distinct impression that the NNOC know exactly what is what. If the "It remains unclear whether high testosterone levels give athletes a competitive edge, despite WA's policy." has come from the NNOC to that journalist, one could say they are very complicit in perpetuating lies.

This suggests there is evidence that the athletes have a DSD, otherwise why would they be subject to these rules? Having 2 X chromosomes doesn't preclude a person also having a Y chromosome or a fragment of a Y chromosome containing the SRY region which determines male development. None of these conditions necessarily precludes also having another DSD. As far as I can tell, we don't know enough about these athletes situations and results to make a definitive judgement. The article doesn't mention their gender identity so labelling them as 'cis' seems like a bit of an overreach unless you know more about it than I do.

I listened to the Science of Sport podcast last night. They talked about these athletes and said they were XY with DSD which explains why they have a sudden increase in performance between the ages of 16-18.

Also, cyclingmum, you were going to show us the evidence that has convinced you that testosterone makes little difference, and also that most transwomen have testosterone levels under 2.

Many of us on this thread would be very interested to read any studies etc that you are basing your opinions on.

"IF this report is accurate"

If the report is accurate and the athletes are women (as in have XX chormosomes) then they cannot be banned from the Olympics as the rules only apply to athletes with 46XY DSDs where there is testes and an androgen response.

If they were XX then their testosterone levels would be irrelevant.

But you know that, you have been told many times.

www.namibian.com.na/103188/read/Namibia-calls-out-World-Athletics

The speculation about "XY" DSD athletes turns out to be inaccurate IF this report is accurate.

This means that biological XX women have been excluded because their naturally occurring Testosterone levels have been deemed "too high".

www.namibian.com.na/103188/read/Namibia-calls-out-World-Athletics

An update for those interested in such matters. And particularly calling out for these "XY athletes to be banned from women's Sport". These athletes are XX CIS gendered women.

This really does demonstrate that judgements and policing of athletes because of how they look HAS to stop.

This also confirms that biologically female athletes can have high levels of testosterone