Yes we know _ taskmaster wants to see the medical notes or something before believing the condition is 5α-Reductase 2 deficiency.
Caster Semenya could be forced to undertake hormone therapy for future Olympics
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,413
That is the 'male advantage conferred by the presense of testosterone' value on which the justification for the new regulations (and until recently this discussion) hinges.
The fact that even the IAAF's own study data doesn't support this is seemingly immaterial.
No intersex athlete exhibits the advantage that the IAAF says they would/should, and barely 20% of any female or intersex exhibited any advantage that was presumed linked to testosterone...
The rules don't care about numbers, they care about a theory.
But what does the gap look like between fastest, say, top 3 females and slowest 3 males, across all qualifying rounds? What's the percentage difference and is there any overlap?
I've no problem with that diagnosis.
I want to see solid, independent proof that shows her condition confers the asserted advantage specified, for the reasons specified, ie 10-25% due to male testosterone levels, that both provide a direct performance enhancement and provided a male body due to pubertal virilization.
To date there has been nothing of the sort.
This would be a good one to read the full text: https://www.researchgate.net/public...detailed_analysis_of_Caster_Semenya's_results
Peilke is probably the most vocal opposer of the IAAF position:
Scientific integrity and the IAAF testosterone regulations - The International Sports Law Journal
In April 2018, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) announced new regulations governing the eligibility of certain female athletes with differences of sexual development accompanied by elevated levels of natural testosterone. Such women with testosterone levels above a...
link.springer.com
When Bad Science Serves Injustice Scientists Should Act
The British Journal of Sports Medicine should retract fatally flawed research used to justify human rights violations
rogerpielkejr.substack.com
However, this is probably the best scientific examination of the whole situation that I could find: https://sportsscientists.com/2019/0...performance-the-cas-ruling-on-caster-semenya/
And that's exactly what I've been asking you for all this time, yet you've only responded with the IAAF's own position on it, before dismissing and disregarding any opposition, ignoring further questioning, and then deflecting off into your Dowie Hole with misrepresentations, strawmen and witter about micropenises and amateur athletes from Kent.
You support the very dodgy IAAF position, but have not once substantiated it, and are seemingly now even upset when I do take the IAAF's line on it!.
Eh? You're well aware that I've directly asked you why several times, none of what I've said depends on the views of anyone else.
You're not taking the IAAF's line on it, are you? Instead of replying with whatever hangups you have about micropenises etc.. why not just address the question?
Why do *you* expect that? Are you able to answer or will you just reply with more deflection and some waffle about unnamed experts and vague claims about taking the IAAF position... I'm asking about the ttaskmaster position here.
Can you show where the IAAF said Semenya would or should beat the very best few women in the world by 10-12%? I think you're drawing a dubious conclusion here yourself which is flawed for the reasons already explained and perhaps why you can't give a straight answer to it when questioned.
Last edited:
I did try to highlight this to him earlier... that he was comparing some general advantage to a specific event... but he kicked off. He still won't address why he'd expect to see Semenya beat the very best women in the world by 10%+
I don't think the penny has dropped yet that just because you might expect the very best men in the world to do that doesn't mean you'd necessarily expect the best intersex male to do so just as you'd not expect the best from some other much smaller subset of males like the best 800m runner in Kent.
It's an 'on average' figure across all Olympic disciplines.. which is why the advantage of being male varies so much across different events, as above some events the 'advantage' drops to under 5% and in others it rockets to 30%, the only thing that doesn't change is there is an advantage to being male.
The issue for me is that the IAAF/IOC have tried to be 'progressive' by allowing biological males who presented as female at birth (caster's condition) to race against women. As pointed out in the article I've linked below, its extremely likely that Caster's condition would have been picked up at birth or at the latest in the weeks following and that they would be male on their birth certificate in a developed country.
I'm of the opinion that any biological male should be banned from competing against biological female regardless, doesn't matter if they are trans or intersex, they should be competing in the correct gender field. You'll note that there is zero issue for a biological female that presents as male competing against men, why do you think that is?
Kind of ironic don't you think.
Knock yourself out mate:
Athletics at the 2016 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metres - Wikipedia
and
Only 2 women would have got through the preliminaries (qualifying) and into the 100m heats proper and they would have both finished dead last
Think you should have a read of this personallyI've no problem with that diagnosis.
I want to see solid, independent proof that shows her condition confers the asserted advantage specified, for the reasons specified, ie 10-25% due to male testosterone levels, that both provide a direct performance enhancement and provided a male body due to pubertal virilization.
To date there has been nothing of the sort.
This would be a good one to read the full text: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339233846_Outstanding_performances_during_elite-standard_short_and_middle-distance_finals_and_the_hyperandrogenism_regulation-A_detailed_analysis_of_Caster_Semenya's_results
Peilke is probably the most vocal opposer of the IAAF position:
Scientific integrity and the IAAF testosterone regulations - The International Sports Law Journal
In April 2018, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) announced new regulations governing the eligibility of certain female athletes with differences of sexual development accompanied by elevated levels of natural testosterone. Such women with testosterone levels above a...When Bad Science Serves Injustice Scientists Should Act
The British Journal of Sports Medicine should retract fatally flawed research used to justify human rights violations
However, this is probably the best scientific examination of the whole situation that I could find: https://sportsscientists.com/2019/0...performance-the-cas-ruling-on-caster-semenya/
All of Your Questions Answered on the Caster Semenya Controversy
Last week, a woman who is the poster athlete for perseverance and grit had her career and livelihood ripped away from her. She did nothing wrong. She did not use performance enhancing drugs like ma…
www.scienceofrunning.com
Dowie's point is that there is nothing to suggest that Caster would be an 'elite' male athlete if they were to be completing in the men's competition, they would actually in all likelihood just be a very good 'county' level athlete. You seem to be assuming that as they are a) male and b) an OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETE, that they should be posting times similar to the very best male athletes. Do you not see the flaw in your argument?
Last edited:
This guy seems to be a bit of a climate 'crisis' denier, i would never have guessed that someone who ascribes to the theory that intersex athletes such as Caster don't benefit from male biological/physical traits is also one of those /sarcasmWhen Bad Science Serves Injustice Scientists Should Act
The British Journal of Sports Medicine should retract fatally flawed research used to justify human rights violations
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,413
The micropenis thing is yours, and has been all along.
And yes, I am taking the IAAF's line on it, which is why you're now taking the perspective of it being flawed.
My position is that the IAAF's reasearch and reasoning are both flawed to ****, full of holes and use cherry-picked janky science to support a very narrow policy that contradicts itself... none of which justifies or supports their decisions on Semenya and similar athletes. There are also a number of ethical and moral issues resulting from the same, but that part of the discussion seems to have been utterly ignored.
I *expect* what I said earlier on the basis of that's what everyone has been saying - She's a male, she has all the male advantages, has testosterone that causes all the male advantages, etc etc... and when you ask what this advantage actually is, the IAAF's 10-12% "in all running events" gets trotted out, although some studies state 10.7% as the stable gender gap since 1983, when charting only the performance stats across the decades.
Either way, that performance advantage is pretty consistently reported between the sexes, even if testosterone levels are not.
"If a 46 XY DSD athlete's body can make use of the testosterone that it produces, then she has all the same advantages as a 46 XY man has over a 46 XX woman"
IAAF's own FAQ.
"Prior to male puberty there is little or no difference between male and female athletic performance. However, after the onset of puberty, male testosterone levels increase to around 15 nmol/L while female testosterone levels remain under 2 nmol/L. At the same time, males become 10-12% better at running events and 20% better in jumping events"
Prof. David Handelsman delivering the IAAF's submission in the 2018 case vs Semenya.
"There is a wide sex difference in circulating testosterone concentrations and a reproducible dose-response relationship between circulating testosterone and muscle mass and strength as well as circulating hemoglobin in both men and women. These dichotomies largely account for the sex differences in muscle mass and strength and circulating hemoglobin levels that result in at least an 8% to 12% ergogenic advantage in men".
Handelsman again, this time with Bermon and Hirschberg in 'Circulating Testosterone as the Hormonal Basis of Sex Differences in Athletic Performance' which was cited during the IAAF case.
"CAS accepted this, and therefore accepted that the main driver of the marked sex difference in sport performance (10-12% on average) is the physical advantages conferred by having testosterone levels in the male range (7.7 - 29.4 nmol/L in blood) rather than the normal female range (06 - 1.68 nmol/L)".
Their studies did not actually show any such advantage and such assertions based on this are equally inconsistent (as to whether they are overall averages, entire population averages, or just limited to the best male vs best female), but again the actual numbers do not seem to matter to them or to most people involved in this discussion - It doesn't matter if an intersex athlete does beat anyone by 10-12%, it only matters that this is the advantage they are asserted to have.
And you don't find it odd that those events where the advantage is actually highest are not included in the Restricted Events list?
Well, no they haven't. They've banned those with Caster's condition... but they have allowed those with conditions such as Dutee Chand, whose body they assert cannot use her high testosterone and thus derives no such T-associated advantage.
Caster's condition also results in high testosterone, but means her body cannot convert it to DHT - This firstly suggests to me that she also cannot derive any advantage from circulating testosterone, but secondly that her "male body" is not the result of pubertal virilization because her DHT is ******, which is why she has female genitals. This is why I regard her as genetically male, but biologically female.
My actual issue with this, is that they allowed one DSD athlete on the above basis, but seemingly have not conducted a similar assessment of others with DSD conditions such as Semenya, to establish whether there actually is any such advantage from the testosterone on which she is banned. I would expect a fair approach to be a similar assessment of every individual DSD.
I feel the evidence disagrees.
DSD conditions present on a widely variable spectrum. Some do have very obvious differences and ambiguities at birth, and sometimes surgery is used to 'correct' things. Others present much later, while others still present with no such evidence at all.
You'll find plenty of stories from intersex people (and their parents, doctors, etc) in developed countries, who did not find out until there were differences in their pubertal development... Others still don't find out until they experience difficulties in conceiving and go to get fertility treatments.
In some cases, DSD conditions are even such that they can actually get pregnant.
In addition, Semenya herself was subjected to IAAF physical examination and clinical testing, to assess her sex, and was cleared to compete as a woman. This suggests that even experts from developed nations found no immediate signs of virilisation in the Stage 1 testing, which led to the Stage 2 and 3 that drilled down into her DNA to find the answers.
I would agree that it is more likely her condition would have been identified in a more developed nation, or in any nation where intersexers might be more common... but that's nothing close to a guarantee.
And that's why some DSDs are permitted by the regulations - They may well be (and actually are, by definition) genetically male, but the behaviour of their bodies classifies them as biologically female.
About as ironic as rain on your wedding day, but that's one of the points I've always made about this.
So to avoid any derailing debate about whether or not I can count - What would you say is the performance percentage gap between male and female athletes?
It was a pretty good read. A bit lacking on the specific medical science side, and asserting something as being 'clear evidence of an advantage', where other articles by scientific and medical professionals lean toward 'may be evidence of the potential for advantage'.... the latter taking that perspective on the basis of insufficient evidence, questionable data, flawed methodologies, etc.
But generally enough sensibility for a general approach that I would give it a decent credibility. Certainly a lot more than any of the IAAF flunkeys.
I may be slightly biassed in my appreciation for Magness's opinion, as he uses some of the same articles and studies I do to draw the same opinions. He also seems to be mates with Ross Tucker, who wrote several of my favourite pieces that 'strongly object' to the IAAF's studies. Dunno if that matters any...
"It’s important to realize that in this argument you can be for division by sex and the CAS decision, but against how the IAAF is enforcing it"
What more can I say?
Again, it comes back to something that most people seem to agree on - There isn't enough (and in fact, barely any) data on actual, specific DSD-ers to definitively say (beyond a very rough and shaky assumption) whether any of the widely variable conditions, or the individuals upon those spectrums, actually have any advantage, or whether those advantages are enough of a difference to make a difference.
He did eventually post something along those lines, in among the loaded questions, misrepresentations and other ********, yes.
However, she has been AFAB, raised as female and previously was even approved to compete as a female by the IAAF themselves. It's only since the subsequent moving of the goalposts that anything has really changed.
That's how it is generally presented - She's male, she's got testosterone, she's got bulging muscles, she's got balls (and a micro-peen, don't forget), and she's in the Olympics... If she's 100% male, but not an Olympic level athlete, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.
As detailed above, I personally don't believe she's developed enough to be considered male and still question the seemingly-unsubstantiated assertions about any male-only advantages resulting from her condition... but my personal beliefs are not what I'm objecting to and challenging.
He has that reputation, which (funnily enough) appears to have been mostly inspired by the polarised opinions on the matter, as people seem to be all in favour of one side or the other - He himself has written about that: https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/stuck-between-doom-and-denialThis guy seems to be a bit of a climate 'crisis' denier, i would never have guessed that someone who ascribes to the theory that intersex athletes such as Caster don't benefit from male biological/physical traits is also one of those /sarcasm
He also seems to have a history of upsetting people with his more nuanced perspectives: https://www.desmog.com/roger-pielke-jr/
So not actually a denier, so much as just one of many academics publicly arguing amongst themselves and smearing each other, without making much actual progress on tackling climate change.
But if we're into discrediting people - Both Pierre-Yves Garnier (as in Bermon-Garnier's 2127 Observations study) and IAAF president Lamine Diack got in trouble for taking bribe-money to cover up Russian doping... although Garnier was only suspended by the IAAF's own ethics board, while Diack and his son were convicted on money laundering and bribery charges. Diack the younger seems also to have convictions for skimming 15mil off the IAAF and for being an accessory to bribery in the Russian doping cover-up.
IAAF suspends 3 staff members in ethics probe
Three staff members have been suspended by track and field's world governing body in an ethics investigation linked to Russian doping.
As I suspected, you're drawing a dubious conclusion yourself the quotes below don't claim that she should beat the very best women in the world by 10-12%, they relate to males in general. Do you still not get the issue here?
The average male can't beat the very best females in the world over 800m, the average male could beat the average female though!
So now to this point:
She's only in the Olympics because she's competing in the female category. On what basis would you expect her to be among the very best males in the world?
You still can't seem to address that point or perhaps you genuinely don't understand it, you come back with the multi quotes waffling on but the crux of your argument seems to rest on a point that has a fundamental flaw to it.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,413
Fine, you win. I concede every single point.
Looks like the IOC still hasn't got a grip of this issue:
You'd think after the Semenya nonsense they'd have sorted out some better rules, sex testing can be done via a swab and these days I don't think there's much excuse - the athletes know full well what they are, possibly some of them initially thought they were normal girls and only learned they were biological males during puberty or something but by the time they've gotten to the Olympics they know full well and they're basically just cheats at this point.
The boxing thing is ridiculous, it's literally that SouthPark episode, not just a fairness issue but a safety issue too!
You'd think after the Semenya nonsense they'd have sorted out some better rules, sex testing can be done via a swab and these days I don't think there's much excuse - the athletes know full well what they are, possibly some of them initially thought they were normal girls and only learned they were biological males during puberty or something but by the time they've gotten to the Olympics they know full well and they're basically just cheats at this point.
The boxing thing is ridiculous, it's literally that SouthPark episode, not just a fairness issue but a safety issue too!
So it’s not having a womb, it’s not having a vagina or boobs, now the female divisions mean you can have no genetic advantages?
Do the men get to complain about the mutations and deviations that their competitors can have, like Phelps and his lactic acid thing or tall basketball players?
Should we set up different categories entirely?
Men, Men with advantages genetically, Women, Women with advantages genetically.
The funny thing is, this all chromosomed up female boxer…. has a 5% knockout rate. The Italian boxer was just a rubbish boxer and turned into a punch poorly whilst dropping her hands and raising her head. She got rocked and gave up. Very poor. There’s girls in my gym that would beat her.
Do the men get to complain about the mutations and deviations that their competitors can have, like Phelps and his lactic acid thing or tall basketball players?
Should we set up different categories entirely?
Men, Men with advantages genetically, Women, Women with advantages genetically.
The funny thing is, this all chromosomed up female boxer…. has a 5% knockout rate. The Italian boxer was just a rubbish boxer and turned into a punch poorly whilst dropping her hands and raising her head. She got rocked and gave up. Very poor. There’s girls in my gym that would beat her.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,682
So, two players scored five goals between them in one game?
That's not that unusual.
Zambia lost that game 6-5, and it sounds like it was pretty good.
"1-0 Zambia. 1-1 Australia. 2-1 Zambia. 3-1 Zambia. 3-2 Australia. 4-2 Zambia. 5-2 Zambia. 5-3 Australia. 5-4 Australia. 5-5 Australia, through a VAR-awarded penalty, 5-6 Australia"
Last edited:
No apparently at this Oylmpics they mean you can be a male with a DSD condition and male advantages and still compete.
But really the Female divisions should be for Female athletes not males who identify as women (trans or intersex).
Fine perhaps with some DSD conditions where the condition doesn't confer male advantages and maybe an argument for sports like darts and snooker but with athletics there's an obvious fairness issue and with sports like Boxing there's an obvious safety issue too.
What makes you think the number of goals they scored is the unusual thing here?
I’d rather let actual women speak for women’s sports. Considering most of the posters here struggle to even talk to women, never mind actually help them in sport to any degree, it’s probably for the best that you sit down and listen rather than post.
Soldato
The whole imane boxing thing seems a bit over blown. If I understand correctly she was born female and has all female parts but has high test? Yet people are calling her trans etc when she isn’t.
Also seems she’s not very good and has lost 9 times already.
Not to mention her knockout percentage is pathetic, if she was a man fighting a woman she would be koing them all. She has 5 ko’s in 37 wins. If that was a man would be labelled pillow fisted.
Also seems she’s not very good and has lost 9 times already.
Not to mention her knockout percentage is pathetic, if she was a man fighting a woman she would be koing them all. She has 5 ko’s in 37 wins. If that was a man would be labelled pillow fisted.
Last edited:
It's a tricky subject really. If they're born as a woman but have, naturally occurring, higher levels of testosterone then I think it would be unfair to say that can't compete against women.
In sports Athletes at the pointy end often have some form of natural advantage over their competitors and if you want to draw up an arbitrary number, someone is going to miss out.
It would be like saying "Ok you can't compete if you're over 7' because it's not fair to everyone else", Telling Phelps that due to his increased lung capacity compared to pretty much everyone else, it's not fair. Same as telling Usain bolt cause he has longer legs than your typical sprinter he shouldn't be allowed to compete.
Not sure how many of you follow boxing but there is a mean, mean dude called Artur Beterbiev. He actually had a fight with Callum Smith back in December. Shortly before the fight it turned out the Beterbiev had an atypical test result for testosterone. Very long story short but after a few tests and seeing that everything remained consistent it turns out Beterbiev just has higher natural levels of testosterone compared to the regular person. Should he be exempt from being able to compete?
I think if it's a naturally occurring thing then you should be able to compete against the same sex you were born as. We are biological beings, things will change from person to person.
I do not think though that a trans-person should be able to compete agaisnt the sex their transitioning to.
In sports Athletes at the pointy end often have some form of natural advantage over their competitors and if you want to draw up an arbitrary number, someone is going to miss out.
It would be like saying "Ok you can't compete if you're over 7' because it's not fair to everyone else", Telling Phelps that due to his increased lung capacity compared to pretty much everyone else, it's not fair. Same as telling Usain bolt cause he has longer legs than your typical sprinter he shouldn't be allowed to compete.
Not sure how many of you follow boxing but there is a mean, mean dude called Artur Beterbiev. He actually had a fight with Callum Smith back in December. Shortly before the fight it turned out the Beterbiev had an atypical test result for testosterone. Very long story short but after a few tests and seeing that everything remained consistent it turns out Beterbiev just has higher natural levels of testosterone compared to the regular person. Should he be exempt from being able to compete?
I think if it's a naturally occurring thing then you should be able to compete against the same sex you were born as. We are biological beings, things will change from person to person.
I do not think though that a trans-person should be able to compete agaisnt the sex their transitioning to.
It isn't that she can't compete; just that her biological advantage means she may be better off competing with dudes.
Man of Honour
They got demolished by an Irish woman last Olympics didn't they? Then again the Irish are a different bread when it comes to a good scrap...
Soldato
You would guess it's because the author mentioned the number of goals and time frame in the original Tweet. Seems a little odd to add that if there was no connotation that it was unusual or strange from the author
