Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

New BMJ Article on Trans-Athletes

61 replies

ThisZippyBlueCat · 05/02/2026 06:35

Body composition and physical fitness in transgender versus cisgender individuals: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

"Conclusion: While transgender women exhibited higher lean mass than cisgender women, their physical fitness was comparable. Current evidence is mostly low certainty and has heterogenous quality but does not support theories of inherent athletic advantages for transgender women over cisgender."

Mendes Sieczkowska S, Caruso Mazzolani B, Reis Coimbra D, et al. Body composition and physical fitness in transgender versus cisgender individuals: a systematic review with meta-analysis British Journal of Sports Medicine Published Online First: 03 February 2026. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2025-110239

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2026/01/22/bjsports-2025-110239

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
LifeisLemons · 05/02/2026 08:05

@ThisZippyBlueCat

3/10 must try harder. 🤦🏻‍♀️

TheHereticalOne · 05/02/2026 07:59

May I commend Emma Hilton to your notice?

She is a very clear and interesting developmental biologist with a fondness for robust science (and beetles).

She has already given her initial comments on this study: https://x.com/FondOfBeetles/status/2018976777176039808

Emma Hilton (@FondOfBeetles) on X

What an insane bunch of cherry-picked metrics, cobbled together to try and argue that trans-identifying males should be in female sport. https://t.co/5VVqzsw8mK

https://x.com/FondOfBeetles/status/2018976777176039808

Shedmistress · 05/02/2026 07:45

It's a complete mystery who in this picture is male. Scientists are utterly baffled.

New BMJ Article on Trans-Athletes
TheBlythe · 05/02/2026 07:38

Ereshkigalangcleg · 05/02/2026 06:41

It suggests an ideological bias.

Show quote history

Suggests? It screams it!

oldtiredcyclist · 05/02/2026 07:19

As soon as someone uses the term "cisgender", you already have a fair idea about which side of the gender debate they are on. They could have said "transwomen" and "women", but chose not to.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 05/02/2026 06:48

Has your other goady thread been deleted OP?

BellissimoGecko · 05/02/2026 06:45

Doesn’t include enough information for us to draw any conclusions. What were the relative fitness levels of all participants? Ages? Only 54 participants: a very small study.

And what’s the scientific point of such a study?
Women’s sport is for women. Men are not invited or welcome.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 05/02/2026 06:41

Motnight · 05/02/2026 06:38

Cisgender?? Why not just biological?! Thanks for the link @ThisZippyBlueCat. Will have a read of this but the language used has already annoyed me!

It suggests an ideological bias.

TheAutumnCrow · 05/02/2026 06:40

The BMJ is about as scientific these days as Viz Comic.

Motnight · 05/02/2026 06:38

Cisgender?? Why not just biological?! Thanks for the link @ThisZippyBlueCat. Will have a read of this but the language used has already annoyed me!