Trans women retain 12% edge in tests two years after transitioning

[Winesalot]

This is interesting. I look forward to seeing the study.

I would like to know how long they continued to track the participants and whether they changed their exercise regime at all. And how many years before that speed advantage disappeared. Did the lower rep/speed requirements mean the participants no longer trained the same? There are so many questions and It seems restricted to timed sit ups, push ups and running.

And of course, will the IOC do anything in time for the Olympics?

‘When asked for its response to the new research the IOC said it was now working on a “a framework for voluntary guidelines on the basis of gender identity and sex characteristics”, adding: “Overall, the discussions to date have confirmed considerable tension between the notions of fairness and inclusion, and the desire and need to protect the women’s category, all of which will need to be reconciled. The IOC aims to release this framework in 2021.” ‘

Emma Hilton will be checking this study out I am sure. Particularly with an eye on her and Tommy Lundberg’s review that I believe is due to be published soon as it has come through peer review apparently.

Sorry that was in response to Rufus

So when they were testing how did they account for participant bias?

This was my thing too. Knowing that the military has different minimum standards to achieve for passing fitness for males and females, as these were not sports people striving to beat their personal bests etc, wouldn't at least a proportion of them just aim to beat the female levels. That would give false readings and the results could be that if they trained as they usually did that the difference would be greater.

Ross did pick this up I see. But also... didn’t Harper state that some TW will change their training so their body shape becomes more like the woman they aim to be. How much of this comes into play here too?

It seems it only did up to 3 years and the transwomen seemingly got faster in that 2-2.5 year mark.

As Ross Tucker says, it merely upholds the other findings at this stage.

And now Dr Hilton’s thread.

twitter.com/fondofbeetles/status/1336227974757163008?s=21

Yes - she notes that the situp/pushups are a target to reach, so the chances are that once someone's met the target, they don't bother going further (except possibly with transmen who are trying to prove themselves).

This tallies with what I know of Combat Fitness tests - my dad used to have to do it once a year, and he had it down to a fine art of not expending more effort than he needed to - hitting the time for the run almost exactly each time.

he had it down to a fine art of not expending more effort than he needed to

I have quite a few military friends who tell me this which is why when I first read the Guardian article, this was my first thought.

And apparently the authors also noted that push up reductions could very well be related to achieving the body they want, ie. reducing bulk from arms and shoulders.

@Motherhubbardinthecellar

So when they were testing how did they account for participant bias?

Transwomen we are looking to see how different you are from women by testing your atheletic ability?

I haven't had chance to read the full text yet, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they were just analysing existing data from the military records of annual fitness testing rather than collecting their own data. Of course, there is still the issue of if the men who transitioned no longer trained as hard to meet the women's requirements (and vice versa).

Exactly hecates

This appears to be a technique used across all aspects of this type of debate

Pretend that things known over centuries are complete and utter fiction

Weve never segregated on sex and there are literally no physical differences at all between males and females

Its all in our minds apparently....my minds neither blind nor stupid thank you very much

they were just analysing existing data from the military records of annual fitness testing rather than collecting their own data.
This is true.

Ross Tucker analyses the paper.

twitter.com/scienceofsport/status/1336208214191378432?s=21

Having watched Paris Lees on that celeb island show a few years ago, I would say that performative feebleness is definitely among some TW.

I have quite a few military friends who tell me this which is why when I first read the Guardian article, this was my first thought.

Actually thinking about it, something else he said was that the youngsters often did make a competition of it until they learned the error of their ways, so some of the fall off is just going to be getting old and jaded :D

I will wait to see if there is any copies that are not behind a paywall in the future to read.

It's worth emailing the corresponding author to ask if they will share a copy with you, if you haven't managed to get hold of it.

This has been identified by the authors and others like Dr Hilton and Ross Tucker. As Emma Hilton points out though, the running is a good measure because it shows those body structure and male puberty benefits as people don’t tend to consciously adjust their stride with transition.

And the increase in speed could be the dropping out of slower participants from the previous periods.

@Motherhubbardinthecellar

So transwomen only have to meet the women’s fitness targets?

If transwomen trained to a lower standard and only needed to achieve a lower level in the tests used in this study then that is a huge confounder that cannot be removed from the results. It is not possible to say that reduction in performance can be attributed to hormones or any other factor: it may all be down to training and participants knowledge of the different targets.

Exactly. To take this at face value means we’d have to forget everything we know about what the expectation of your performance does to your performance.

None of this undoes everything we know already about the difference between men’s and women’s physiology, it’s all angels on a pinhead stuff. How weak does a male born body have to be to count as a woman’s body? I’m sure there are any amount of modestly talented males who would love a crack at women’s sports instead so they could clean up. It is only a matter of time before people are pushing for the inclusion of non binary males in the women’s category (because logically, how can you not?) and that really does mean just welcoming any old man in.

In the meantime, while we’re operating on the presumption of inclusion, a generation of female athletes will lose out. They don’t have the luxury of time.

The Hilton and Lundberg review has now been published.

link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3

It now includes a section reviewing data gathered to compare the performance of children before puberty as well. From the Australian school study and one from Greece.

Interesting.

I don't understand why Motherhubbard's post was deleted. What's wrong with commenting on potential reasons for a reduction in performance & how that might affect the study?

"‘When asked for its response to the new research the IOC said it was now working on a “a framework for voluntary guidelines on the basis of gender identity and sex characteristics”, adding: “Overall, the discussions to date have confirmed considerable tension between the notions of fairness and inclusion, and the desire and need to protect the women’s category, all of which will need to be reconciled. The IOC aims to release this framework in 2021.” ‘"

What am I missing here? Is sport meant to be there to validate feelings?

And talk about "inclusion" - the whole point why we have women's sport is so that women are included. I legitimately don't even understand why this particular issue is even a debate.

I’d have thought ‘fairness’ was on the side of protecting the women’s category.