Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,375
"Endocrine profiles have been measured on blood samples obtained immediately post-competition from 693 elite athletes from 15 Olympic Sports competing at National or International level"They arent all 'Olympic' athletes? And the samples were taken in 2014 from what i can ascertain
These were supposedly taken at major competitive events (one source states that the original samples were drawn at the 2012 Olympics) and if they're the elite athletes in olympic sports, that's pretty much the top of the game. I would therefore expect to see all of these top performers with massive testosterone levels, if testosterone is what makes them so good. Instead, we see athletes with surprisingly low levels, seemingly in 25% of men and abnormally high in about 16% of women, with an overlap between sexes in the lower-mid range around the 5-10nmol range.
"The endocrine part of the data can be shared on an anonymous basis. However, the performance part of the data which is linked to the endocrine part cannot be shared since it could allow individuals to be identified and constitutes a breach of confidentiality"bear in mind the samples were anonymous, they have no idea where the participants of the study had finished in their chosen event, nor could they rule out the possibility of doping
From the 2127 observations. Presumably similar data protection applies across all studies, then?
I thought the results of four suspected-intersex participants had been deliberately excluded from the analysis.Also given the date of the study, it's entirely possible the female athletes with abnormally high testosterone levels were intersex - I read somewhere (think it was in one of the studies referenced) that the number of intersex female athletes is abnormally high when compared to the 'normal' population.
And yes, I also had read that a lot of elite athletes have been 'outed' as, or discovered to be, intersex... Often with this being the first they'd heard of it.
Either way,
"However, the most distinctive criterion in differentiating between male and female athletes was their LBM, as the research established that females have 85 per cent of the LBM of males. Researchers believe that these findings are sufficient to account for ‘observed differences in strength and aerobic performance’ between male and female athletes, ‘without the need to hypothesize that performance is in any way determined by the differences in testosterone levels’. The researchers additionally suggest that the findings ‘negate completely the hypothesis concerning testosterone levels proposed by IAAF/IOC’. The authors conclude that hormonal profiles of elite athletes differ from the usual reference range, and that ‘the IOC definition of a woman as one who has a normal testosterone level is untenable’"
![www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/corehtml/pmc/pmcgifs/pmc-card-share.jpg?_=0)
The testosterone rule—constructing fairness in professional sport
![www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/coreutils/nwds/img/favicons/favicon.png)
Absolutely, and that's why I take issue with those who have voluntarily modified themselves being allowed to compete, while those who have done nothing except exist as nature made them are prohibited.There's a huge difference between someone that's trans and someone that's intersex is there not? Specifically, someone that falls under the 46 XY DSD category, pretty disingenuous to label them all under the same umbrella imo.
That seems the complete opposite of the fairness they're on about.
These 2127 observations - How many individual athletes is that, and what's the male/female split?It's in reference material of the study you linked:
Conclusion: Female athletes with high fT levels have a significant competitive advantage over those with low fT in 400 m, 400 m hurdles, 800 m, hammer throw, and pole vault.
Also, not to be picky, but is this the one study (aka the Daegu Study) that the IAAF specifically commissioned and came back with as their sole supporting evidence for the second hearing?
AFAIK, the Daegu study sample excluded 10 women, 5 due to doping and the other 5 due to DSD conditions anyway...
"Results demonstrated that median testosterone levels among elite female athletes were similar to those of non-athlete healthy young females (0.69 nmol/L median found in sampled athletes), with the 99th percentile calculated at 3.08 nmol/L. Out of 839 women tested, 9 had testosterone levels greater than 3 nmol/L, and 3 women had levels above 10 nmol/L. Despite the plausible speculation that high-level athlete women would demonstrate higher testosterone levels than their non-athlete counterparts, this hypothesis was not confirmed in the data".
Same link as above.
So despite it being criticized as a circular reinforcement of 'normal' based on studying only what they considered to be 'normal', by excluding the 5 DSD athletes, it still doesn't prove the relationship between testosterone and performance.
"When compared with the lowest female fT tertile, women with the highest fT tertile performed significantly (p<0.05) better in 400 m, 400 m hurdles, 800 m, hammer throw, and pole vault with margins of 2.73%, 2.78%, 1.78%, 4.53%, and 2.94%, respectively. Such a pattern was not found in any of the male athletic events"
So the top 30-odd percent of women perform a couple of percent better than the bottom third, but not much data across each tertile and absolutely nothing even shown for the testosterone-laden male performances at all.
All I ultimately take from this is that there are almost no studies yet that definitively testosterone level provides an advantage, beyond the presumtions and assumptions in a pair of half-assed studies, while various medical specialists continue to refute the theory - Hence the IAAF's assertion is flawed science.
'Normal' woman, yes, but seemingly not always an elite-level athletic woman, especially depending which of the only two studies you favour, and then only applicable to certain "women" with certain conditions and then only in certain events....It was then the IAAF changed tact and introduced the regulations around DSD, which included reducing testosterone levels of athletes identifying as women to 5nmol/L (from 10) which is still magnitudes higher than a 'normal' woman who come in under 2nmol/L.
It's pretty janky discrimination...
You did nothing of the sort.There's no tangent here just directly addressing what you said:
I was talking about several individuals and the various different biological sexes dictated to them. You then made it all about Caster Semenya 'knowing fulll well what she is', which is another example of that same dictation but off on a tangent to what I was originally discussing.
Fine - Remove those male athletes with t-levels lower than 10nmol and especially the 5nmol from the male events, as they're clearly below the 10nmol threshold for the male category, based on their "obvious differences" in testosterone level....They have female levels, so can compete in the womens' events.They are allowed to compete as they're born and no one is deciding their identity for them. They can freely compete in the men's event but if, as biological males, they want to compete in the women's event then they have obvious physical differences a major one being testosterone.
Yes, they have physical differences, but the regulations only care about current testosterone levels, not what might have happened as a result of that testosterone years ago during their long-since-ended puberty....
I am aware, as you will be from reading this thread, that testosterone doping does provide a temporary boost to performance.Are you unaware of things like doping where people use testosterone to seek an unfair advantage?
But I'm also aware, as you also will be from reading this same thread, that natural testosterone does not work the same way, and that anti-doping tests can reliably show the difference...
Why are you asking this? You already know what my position on that is, as I've stated it numerous times.Do you think anyone should be able to compete in the women's event or do you think that there shouldn't even be separate men's and women's events since you're apparently in denial of testosterone having an impact here?
There is no "in denial", there's just no reliable proof and so I reject your assertion... and I'm STILL waiting for you to provide your own proof, as I have been since the previous thread.