Trans athletes research - Brighton

[onlypans]

Does anyone know anything about this? The university are apparently conducting research into the effects of hormone therapy on athletic ability in trans athletes.

The person I spoke to about this said that indications were that the data suggests hormone consumption completely negates any advantages that come from being male. I'm thinking, surely not? Participants in the study were doing activities last week, how can the researchers have run all the data already?

Also, I don't know who is funding the research and whether or not they have an agenda one way or another. The trans person who was telling me about it (I am a secret terf because I'm not brave enough to potentially lose my job) was very happy with what they'd been told and it made me question if the research could be biased towards gender ideology/denial of sex.

Isn't the Loughborough study the one that started with an entire 4 participants and now just consists of Emily Bridges, who has absolutely no incentive to underperform in the tests. No Siree.

I don't really see the point in studying the effects of medicalisation at grass roots sport level. No-one is testing these people (there's no infrastructure for it) and most amateur sports just operate on self-ID anyway.

Is this the one that also involves Blair Hamilton? The one they tweeted to get participants involved ?

All the research is bobbins so far!

That protocol is likely years off being a published study.

Surely, especially given the current climate, the only objective measure of impact would be those measures that require no input by the participants (including no training input) and tested blind. Anything else could be manipulated by participants and researchers.

Looks like some people are trying to erase the meaning of "science" to prop up their erasure of the meaning of the word "woman". How very post-modern....!

If the research subjects know that the research is about the question of whether transwomen fall to the same level of performance as natural women after testosterone suppression, then how do you control for the possibility that the transwomen underperform in order to produce the desired result?

It's very difficult to design research studies that address this question properly.

I always find it remarkable that shortly after the public raises a concern about such considerations, that within months (well-designed studies normally take years to complete) studies are produced that, wow, produce EXACTLY the result desired.

Sounds like it could be the Blair Hamilton research at Brighton? Recruitment by Tweet? Still recruiting though and only at the beginning of research project.

So lowering the hormone levels shrink a man’s bigger heart and lungs?

I suspect it is.

There was discussion around the methodology on twitter when Hamilton tweeted those.

I cannot see that it will bring any surprises, I also cannot see how any studies that a trans person knows is going to shape policy and law will be trustworthy if it simply produces the desired outcome of lowered performance.

greenspaces4peace · Today 05:21

So lowering the hormone levels shrink a man’s bigger heart and lungs?

And change skeletal geometry, which confers a huge advantage to males in upper body strength, torsional forces etc. The only effect of taking female hormones is that a man's performance against other males dips by about 5%

And their bone length presumably. I am waiting for the revelation that transwomen’s pelvic bones change configuration too. Because that is really going to confuse future archaeologists - whereas now they can look at skeletal remains and say categorically male or female by looking at the pelvis, in the future will they be scratching their heads and be unable to make a judgement?

Line 1 of any research should say "Women are not chemically-hobbled men. The end."

Ah, that makes sense - the Blair Hamilton who is a trans person who likes to play women’s football.

Blair might be a teeny bit invested in the outcome of this study showing no male advantage.

I was thinking about the amount of money paid to researchers in the area of trans issues - obviously all geared towards supporting the demands of trans people.

Meanwhile, studies that would actually do some good, like studies on detransitioners are vigorously shut down by trans activists. Detransitioners are finding that there is virtually no support, either medical or psychological, to help with the serious, life changing injuries and harm they have suffered.

Pull the other one

I Don't think I can link to an Instagram post but will try.

Interested in thoughts in this study.

www.instagram.com/p/CoFn-4Zso3q/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Yes. I think that money should be spent to encourage trans people to do sport. But sport either in mixed sex groups or in their own sex. That this scenario ever was allowed to happen is just how ideological and philosophical the argument became.

It’s a literature review, they looked at old studies, which range from non-existent to worthless.

And decided there wasn’t enough evidence to keep transwomen out of female sporting categories.

Well, doh, all the proper sports science looks at male-men and female-women (and the occasional DSD athlete in the female category).

All the trans specific stuff is very new, or has already been admitted shonky by it’s own authors (eg Joanna Harper’s trans runners paper)

By the criteria listed they probably didn’t have a single research paper left standing!

Apologies, the above was for @Tempone

I agree! Everyone should be able to participate in sport for fun and fitness, but sex remains a consideration and female people who don’t take exogenous hormones should always be able to access their own closed activities/competitions.

There are already loads of social barriers for older girls and women of all ages when it comes to participating in sport and fitness. No need to make that worse

But from what the person was telling me, taking hormones just takes trans women to the level of women in terms of speed, strength, physical power etc

This would only work if hormones were the only thing that distinguishes sex, rather than just one factor - especially considering that there isn't hormone A that is only present in females, hormone B that is only present in males, and no crossover between the two.

If having the 'magic mix' of hormones could turn you into the opposite sex, there would be no need for mutilations (AKA 'top surgery' and 'bottom surgery') as the hormones would do their stuff and change every organ and cell in your body to match the 'average' of the opposite sex. A woman could have one of her eggs frozen, become a man via magic hormones and fertilise it 'him'self, then take the 'lady' hormones and become a woman again for the purposes of pregnancy and giving birth to the baby - and thus be listed twice on the birth certificate in both the 'mother' and 'father' boxes.

In theory, a biological woman could also take a proportion of this 'magic mix' to make her 'a bit more male' and thus give her an advantage in women's sports, whilst not having taken enough to make her into an 'actual' recognisable man. But that would doubtless be considered cheating and lead to disqualification.

As long as you accept that 'science' and 'magic' are exactly the same thing, it's all good....

That CCES report has been thoroughly debunked by academics who actually study the science - Pike, Hilton, Tucker, Lundberg, Devine etc.

(The same scientists who are called transphobes for pointing out that T suppression in males does very little to mitigate male advantage).

idrottsforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/devineetal221129.pdf

Think about it for a few seconds. It can't possibly be true.

The analogy I like is to compare the effect of testosterone on the body to that of boiling water on an egg. You can remove the boiling water, but the egg is still fundamentally changed. Similarly, the androgenising effects of T on the male body during puberty are not reversible.

We use different height and weight charts for boys and girls from birth so I’m not convinced that there aren’t substantial differences even before puberty completes (although I do understand the practical reasons for why puberty is the line drawn by a number of sports orgs).

Look, the IOC themselves have debunked this theory (no male advantage in TW) resolutely.

The Brighton study is a complete waste of time.

Don't give it a second thought.