371
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
371 points (97.0% liked)
News
23397 readers
3546 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I may get down voted for this, but there needs to be a distinction between male and female athletes somewhere. There's biological differences in muscle mass and trans women have a biological advantage. I don't necessarily agree with fine, but I do think that cis female sports should have some protections too.
Trans woman have lower muscle mass and strength then average cis females after being HRT.
Not always the case.
So we're protecting the system against the outliers? So we're blocking naturally muscular or otherwise more athletic cis girls from playing? Really tall basketball players? Runners who are just naturally faster? How do you judge they fall too far outside the median range?
Or have you given this no thought and you just think boy things are for boys and girl things for girls and you stopped learning at age 3?
Not to mention that these are already outliers within outliers. Trans people make up like 0.01% of the population, and how many of those are not only still in middle/high school, but also play competitive sports? We're probably talking a couple dozen people total.
I never said that.
What were you saying then? What was your point of saying "not always the case."?
I'm saying that its not always the case that the doctor will tune it so that it could be considered fair. The doctor coule use less HRT in order to give the athlete an unfair advantage.
Is this scientifically verified? If it is, I'd like to see the study. And what is the study's demographic? Because we're only talking about athletics so the demo should be trans athletes vs cis female athletes.
https://academic.oup.com/jes/article/5/Supplement_1/A792/6241278
Reading into this, my main points of concern are that there is only a population of 8 in each group. That's far from clinically significant, but if we pretend for the sake of argument that it is a clinically significant population there's still the fact that TW have more muscle mass and outperformed the CW in their handgrip strength despite lower strength/FFM due to the extra muscle mass. The study authors believe that this is because a difference in oxidative processes in the muscle but don't go on to elaborate their hypothesis so it may allow some TW to take advantage of their extra muscle mass when in competition and other hormones flood the CNS/bloodstream.
My hypothesis would be that adrenaline temporarily helps to overcome the suppression of muscle performance due to hormone therapy. Note that this is my hypothesis and would need to be studied. Maybe I am wrong, but in my clinical experience the observable results run counter to the small scope of this particular study.
I do think more studies need to be done. My opinion is if a cis woman would be barred for PCOS then barring trans women is fine
Look at you, attacking the source before you even see it.
Totally unbiased though.
I what way did I attack it? I asked to see the source and expressed my concern with possible points of scrutiny as it's being presented in the argument at hand. I'm pro-LGBT rights.