Female athletes and testosterone

[Queuingroundtheblock]

Just musing with a friend and we wondered - is the 10 nanomole testosterone limit for Olympic trans women athletes only for tw? Could women take testosterone to boost performance? I mean, obviously it's a really bad idea but just wondered if it's now allowed?

Athletes with DSDs like Caster Semenya and the Namibian athletes have to keep their levels down to 5 nanomoles per liter. This of course is unfair, too.

Why, if these individuals can utilise their elevated testosterone levels for advantage against XX females, is this unfair?

But yes to your last para But neither of these categories of athletes has any business being in a race with women.

If testosterone testing is self reported and not done as out-of-competition testing then that’s an absolute farce.

I wonder if any PP on this thread would care to share their experience?

Ekofisk it's not fair because at the Olympics.

Transwomen have to be below 10 nm/l.
Those with DSDS have to be below 5.

Why the difference? What possible logical reason for it? There isn't one.

The total inconsistency shouts in neon lights that it's all nonsense.

As does the fact that 10nm/l is just within the NORMAL range for men. And what 3 or 4 times normal for women.

If as they seem to believe that the ONLY difference between men and women when it comes to sport is testosterone. Then transwomen would surely need to be in the normal range for women. (They could check what that is for female professional sportspeople they may have a different normal range I don't know).

Do yes it is very unfair that those with DSDs who were taken for female at birth but have internal testicles, have to have half the level of those male at birth whose balls are on the outside.

As does the fact that 10nm/l is just within the NORMAL range for men. And what 3 or 4 times normal for women.

Normal level for a woman is about 0.5. The upper end of "normal" is 1.8 (roughly) and that's pretty unusual, so 10 is an insanely high level to put the limit at.

Oh but SCIENCE.

but not at all.

Getting it that that low for a male would presumably mean massive impact. That's not something to encourage.

The process was started with the aim, how can we let some transwomen in and make it look like we've done it fairly.

It can't be fair. Testosterone is far from being the only difference between men and women when it comes to sport.

Mixed sex sport is ridiculous. And that's the end of that.

Apart from showjumping etc obv!

Transwomen have to be below 10 nm/l.
Those with DSDS have to be below 5.

That’s not the case for athletics.

World Athletics require trans women to be below 5 nmol/l - athletes can’t compete at international level or qualify for the Olympics if they don’t meet this requirement.

The issue is that different sporting bodies have different thresholds.

What is needed is rules based on rigorous scientific research (and not on an undergrad paper where n=8 non elite athletes).

This thread is about the Olympics though.

We don't need a rule based on rigorous scientific research.

We need males to compete with the men. Like was always how it worked.

What is the point of trying to assess the untold number of differences in our... Everything.

We don't even know how plenty of things work anyway so it would be impossible.

Take I dunno. Basketball. Height is a major advantage. Women are on average shorter than men. So. Decide a height that has a bit of overlap with men as a limit? Then bar any women over that height?

Same with hurdles?

Cycling, men have on average a larger lung capacity. Same approach.

And on and on and on.

XX and XY separate is the only fair way. The physiological differences are way too complex to unpick otherwise. With a possible exception for CAIS individuals.

This thread is about the Olympics though.

Sure, but athletes selected for the Olympics do so through their own sporting bodies (such as World Athletics) which may or may not have the same testosterone restrictions as the IOC.

It’s all a mess, and still ignores the fact that athletes that have undergone male puberty retain physiological advantages over female athletes, regardless of testosterone levels.

@Ekofisk

This thread is about the Olympics though.

Sure, but athletes selected for the Olympics do so through their own sporting bodies (such as World Athletics) which may or may not have the same testosterone restrictions as the IOC.

It’s all a mess, and still ignores the fact that athletes that have undergone male puberty retain physiological advantages over female athletes, regardless of testosterone levels.

Exactly. The research shows that going through male puberty gives an advantage that cannot currently be removed. The idea of lowering testosterone after the fact doesn't produce fair competition and needs to be scrapped. Trans and DSD athletes with advantages over females should be accommodated in competition in other categories.

The only realistic way to have fair competition for females at the moment is to have only females in the competition. The fact that so many sports governing bodies are trying to ignore this just shows that they don't care about fairness and don't care about women. We know sports institutions are sexist and they are proving it with every day they retain these misogynist policies.

"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

The process was started with the aim, how can we let some transwomen in and make it look like we've done it fairly.

This is the problem. The assumption that some men should take part in the women's events.

Oh so you disagree with Harper’s conclusion of the 11 study review then. And yes. The eight person study that did include transwomen was pretty light on robust methodology.

Or do you also disagree with the USAF study on trans athletes that also backs up both Hilton and Lundberg and Harper’s conclusions.

Have you got some peer reviewed studies to link up that disprove these studies?

And do you have a vested interest in allowing males to compete in female categories of sport?

I'm looking forward to reading the high quality, peer reviewed research that shows transwomen have no performance advantage over women. Please show us the references.

Any real scientist is happy to discuss their work, its advantages and flaws, what can be learned from it and how it fits into existing knowledge, which Harper and other researchers have done. Are you suggesting that Joanna Harper's most recent paper is wrong, as well as all the other good quality work on the subject from the last few years? What is wrong with it and why?

@Cyclingmum50

"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

Can you have another go, cyclingmum? Autocorrect appears to have sabotaged parts of your post, and I can’t understand it (“customers men”? “ Let’s you so far”?)

As for the personal slights against your unnamed biologist (though we all know who you mean), that really only tells me you can’t attack her science, so you attack her instead (and leave her male co author alone, which is a bit sexist don’t you think?)

What studies do you think are credible? What studies do you think overwrite the basic human physiological fact that everyone knows, which is that male bodies are generally a great deal stronger and faster than female ones?

Why is testosterone a good proxy for reduced performance in trans athletes, in your view?

Fed up of the crap standard of debate from trans allies.

Yes. The fact that Harper’s conclusion also agreed with Dr Hilton and Lundberg’s conclusion must rankle.

No doubt the most credible studies will turn out to be those that support trans women athletes accessing the direct funding, support and benefits earmarked for female athletes.

As for the personal slights against your unnamed biologist (though we all know who you mean), that really only tells me you can’t attack her science, so you attack her instead (and leave her male co author alone, which is a bit sexist don’t you think?)

It’s very telling that some TRAs go out of their way to publicly harass the female scientist whilst ignoring the male one. Seen it time and time again on Twitter. Do they not realise how how obvious it is?
Likewise Sharron Davies get abuse whereas Daley Thompson (who shares the same views as SD) gets no pushback.

@PennineSpring

As for the personal slights against your unnamed biologist (though we all know who you mean), that really only tells me you can’t attack her science, so you attack her instead (and leave her male co author alone, which is a bit sexist don’t you think?)

It’s very telling that some TRAs go out of their way to publicly harass the female scientist whilst ignoring the male one. Seen it time and time again on Twitter. Do they not realise how how obvious it is?
Likewise Sharron Davies get abuse whereas Daley Thompson (who shares the same views as SD) gets no pushback.

Funny that, isn't it? Why on earth could that be?

No males should be allowed in female sport AT ALL, I don't care what they identify as, how much surgery or hormones they have ingested, nor what steps they have taken to reduce their naturally occurring testosterone, the answer is NO to any males whatsoever. Compete in the sex category that applies to you or don't compete at all.

There is no human right to participate in sport but if you want to go down that road then the human rights of females to have full and fair access to their sports are removed by allowing males and individuals who have the same condition Caster Semanya has into that sport. No amount of tinkering around the edges with testosterone levels will ensure fairness.

I know.

You’d almost think that the ideology and its adherents are…howlingly sexist? Shirley not!

So, on the one hand, you have female athletes doing everything to maximise their physical ability, straining every sinew, considering their diet, sleep, analysing their opponents, working with their body and its natural advantages, concentrating on their psychology, putting themselves through gruelling training regimes which push their female body to the absolute maximum.

And then, on the other hand, you have another group of athletes (some of whom are just not quite good enough to make the men's cut or who have 20 years on their fellow competitors or will have noticed that they did not go through a female puberty a decade earlier) who are all about trying to minimise their performance, to the sweet spot where they don't have as much testosterone as they had before but can do enough to beat elite females because the 6500 differences between male and female bodies still come into play.

"To cheat: act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage."

The current IOC rules are dishonest, inconsistent, sexist, unscientific rubbish but anyone with an ounce of personal integrity and respect for female athletes knows that an athlete who has gone through the advantage of a male puberty and uses that advantage unfairly against female athletes is, by definition, a cheat.

@ANewCreation

So, on the one hand, you have female athletes doing everything to maximise their physical ability, straining every sinew, considering their diet, sleep, analysing their opponents, working with their body and its natural advantages, concentrating on their psychology, putting themselves through gruelling training regimes which push their female body to the absolute maximum.

And then, on the other hand, you have another group of athletes (some of whom are just not quite good enough to make the men's cut or who have 20 years on their fellow competitors or will have noticed that they did not go through a female puberty a decade earlier) who are all about trying to minimise their performance, to the sweet spot where they don't have as much testosterone as they had before but can do enough to beat elite females because the 6500 differences between male and female bodies still come into play.

"To cheat: act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage."

The current IOC rules are dishonest, inconsistent, sexist, unscientific rubbish but anyone with an ounce of personal integrity and respect for female athletes knows that an athlete who has gone through the advantage of a male puberty and uses that advantage unfairly against female athletes is, by definition, a cheat.

Excellent post.

This is no more or less than a Cheats Charter, those who use it and those who support that is what you are and what you are supporting, not fairness or rights just plain and simple cheating.

@Cyclingmum50

"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

If you are talking about the review by Hilton and Lundberg, you are also mistaken in that studies of transwomen WERE included. There were others, but I just picked a few.

Gooren LJG, Bunck MCM. Transsexuals and competitive sports. Eur J Endocrinol. 2004;151(4):425–9.

Elbers JM, Asscheman H, Seidell JC, Gooren LJ. Effects of sex steroid hormones on regional fat depots as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in transsexuals. Am J Physiol. 1999;276(2):E317-25.

Van Caenegem E, Wierckx K, Taes Y, et al. Preservation of volumetric bone density and geometry in trans women during cross-sex hormonal therapy: a prospective observational study. Osteoporos Int. 2015a;26(1):35–47.

Mueller A, Zollver H, Kronawitter D, et al. Body composition and bone mineral density in male-to-female transsexuals during cross-sex hormone therapy using gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2011;119(2):95–100.

Klaver M, De Blok CJM, Wiepjes CM, et al. Changes in regional body fat, lean body mass and body shape in trans persons using cross-sex hormonal therapy: results from a multicenter prospective study. Eur J Endocrinol. 2018;178(2):163–71.

Scharff M, Wiepjes CM, Klaver M, et al. Change in grip strength in trans people and its association with lean body mass and bone density. Endocr Connect. 2019;8:1020–8.

Wiik A, Lundberg TR, Rullman E, et al. Muscle strength, size, and composition following 12 months of gender-affirming treatment in transgender individuals. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(3):247.

Lapauw B, Taes Y, Simoens S, et al. Body composition, volumetric and areal bone parameters in male-to-female transsexual persons. Bone. 2008;43(6):1016–21.

Klaver M, Dekker MJHJ, de Mutsert R, et al. Cross-sex hormone therapy in transgender persons affects total body weight, body fat and lean body mass: a meta-analysis. Andrologia. 2017.

So, if Hilton and Lundberg were not who you were referring to, what was the not very ‘credible’ research you meant.

I mean, their findings were similar to Harper’s review of the same data. And Harper is a trans specialist researcher. And the USAF results also supported these studies.

Or, as we have asked, do you have another peer reviewed study (focused on the body advantages NOT a philosophical paper) that you base your assertions on?