You first said gametes for which I gave you a counterexample, but then you switched the premise to the SRY gene whose expression is inherently on a continuum like most genes’.
Nope, learn to read. I said gametes provide the basis for sex differentiation, so obviously someone who has their balls or ovaries cut out are not suddenly sexless. SRY gene, which acts as a transcription factor to act on genes to code for male sex characteristics and prevent female sex characteristics. It's literally called the Sex Determining Region y protein.
Also, SRY gene expression does not vary on a "continuum." Intersex conditions involving the SRY gene are either the result of SRY-variants and are not the result of original SRY-gene expression (Swyer syndrome), or the translocation of the SRY gene from the Y chromosome to an X chromosome (46 XX). So the presence or lack thereof of the Sex Determining Region Y Protein (SRY) Gene does determine sex, and there are no third sexes.
The words below are literally your words that you are adjusting now. There are tons of threads where a number of us have given your counter examples to karyotype based binary sex classification as well. This loopy conversation isn’t interesting to me, so have a good one.
”No it doesn't. Sexual DImorphism is based on the existence of TWO sex gametes. There are male gametes (sperm) and female gametes (eggs). Your genetics determine which one of these two gametes your body is designed to be able to produce. As soon as someone can provide evidence for the existence of a third gamete, then the sex binary can be challenged”
No transwomen even play in the WBNA, maybe her opinion isn't the most valid since she isn't affected.
What in god's name is your obsession with letting men play in women's sports, by the way? If it's such a trivial issue, I wonder why the left fights tooth and nail to let men play in women's sports.
No transwoman has ever played in WNBA. No transwoman has ever played in D1 NCAA women's basketball. So it's not the most pressing issue.
But is it a pressing issue in track & field? How many trans women have competed in World Athletics Championships? How many in USATF? ZERO.
It's not even a pressing issue in swimming. There was ZERO trans swimmer in last month's NCAA Championships. There will be ZERO in this summer's US trial for the World Championships.
I am not "obsessed" by any means. It's people who start threads like this who are obsessed.
Good, then you should have nothing to worry about then if transwomen are prohibited from competing women's sports, since none of them compete in women's sports to begin with. What a relief that must be for you!
No transwomen even play in the WBNA, maybe her opinion isn't the most valid since she isn't affected.
Her point is that the bigger problem for female athletes is that their very legitimacy is not respected and that politics around trans-athletes is a lousy proxy for respecting women's athletics.
If you had any self awareness at all you might realize that your dismissing her opinion without any apparent attempt to hear it is literally what she's talking about.
The words below are literally your words that you are adjusting now. There are tons of threads where a number of us have given your counter examples to karyotype based binary sex classification as well. This loopy conversation isn’t interesting to me, so have a good one.
”No it doesn't. Sexual DImorphism is based on the existence of TWO sex gametes. There are male gametes (sperm) and female gametes (eggs). Your genetics determine which one of these two gametes your body is designed to be able to produce. As soon as someone can provide evidence for the existence of a third gamete, then the sex binary can be challenged”
Oh dear, not another one of these sophists out to tell the world that our utterly binary sex system is in fact a spectrum. The flat earthers of 2023. It would actually be quite amusing if there weren't so many gullible fools out there who think that variation within a sex or of secondary sex characteristics means that sex itself isn't binary. One thing I can absolutely guarantee; the author of the quoted post's father was male and his small gamete combined with his female mother's large gamete.
I'm providing it so others here can see for themselves what the actual paper looked into and what it says in full.
That way, everyone can see from the text and the images the authors provided that this study did not look at "pelvic geometry" like you claim. It looked at a small, specific part of the upper femur in the non-dominant leg of the young participants as seen on images taken from bone scans. Moreover, it only looked at two aspects of their upper femurs, namely the "subperiosteal width and endocortical diameter."
In plain language, the "subperiosteal width" refers to the size of the thickness of the part of the bone known as the periosteum, which is the dense layer of vascularized connective tissue overlying the cortical surface of bones - it's the tissue that makes up the outer covering of bones. The "endocortical diameter" refers to the estimated size of a bone's major interior parts that make up its core based on external features.
Also, for the record, this study did not show that the trans-identified youth whose bone scans were looked at had upper femurs identical to persons of the opposite sex in the two aspects looked at or estimated.
Rather, the paper says that assessment of the trans-identified youth's upper femurs based on bone scan imagery and machine computations showed that these two aspects of their upper femurs "resembled" or had developed "in the direction of" those same aspects found in the femurs of the opposite sex.
Finally, I think it's important to point out that the purpose of this study was not to test any hypothesis regarding pelvis structure of trans-identified youth put on "puberty blockers" and exogenous hormones the way your wholly inaccurate and seemingly-intentionally misleading mischaracterization of its findings suggest.
The purpose of this study was simply to see if trans-identified youths put on "puberty blockers" at, before or shortly after the start of puberty of adolescence - followed by exogenous cross-sex hormones - developed bone problems beyond the worryingly diminished bone mineral density that the use of "gender affirming medicine" in vulnerable, confused young people has already been proven to cause.
The reason the researchers looked at the upper femur near where it joins the hip and thus connects to the pelvis is because the femur is the largest and thickest bone in the human body - thus it's especially easy to see and measure on imaging scans.
The main purpose of the article was not at all about studying bone density problems. The main purpose of the article is clearly stated in the title, described in the abstract, and discussed throughout the article. The purpose was to see if hip bone geometry of transgender people would resemble the gender into which they transitioned if implemented in early puberty. And, this study clearly stated that it did.
"In both trans women and trans men, participants resembled the reference curve for SPW and ED of the experienced gender but only when GnRHa was started during early puberty. Those who started during mid and late puberty remained within the reference curve of the gender assigned at birth. A possible explanation might be sought in the phenomenon of programming, which conceptualizes that stimuli during critical windows of development can have major consequences throughout one's life span."
"This study demonstrated that participants starting the GnRHa treatment in early puberty resemble the change in subperiosteal width and endocortical diameter of the experienced gender during GAH"
"Participants in our current study, starting in mid or late puberty, acquired bone geometry more closely resembling the reference curve of the gender assigned at birth. This illustrates that the main effect of testosterone and estrogen on periosteal and endocortical bone growth occurs during early puberty."
Before puberty, the female and male skeletal structures are very similar. Changes to the skeletal structures are a result of the sex hormones that are produced during puberty. This is not that complicated. If trans women are given estrogen during puberty, then their bone structure will be altered to resemble females. You can easily look at photos of Jazz Jennings and tell that she has a female skeletal structure
Like I said before, if you have evidence proving that sex/gender-confused male children put on GnRHa drugs aka "puberty blockers" as pre-teens, followed by estrogen fairly soon after, go on to develop "a"female skeletal structure" like you claim - including female-shaped pelvises and female Q angles - I will be glad to look at it. If I am wrong, I'll admit it.
But just copying & pasting additional sections from the same paper you linked to the first place isn't convinving evidence.
Also, I already read that paper in full the first time!I And it's not about hip geometry, pelvis shape, or skeletal structure. It's about the outer layer and one of the core inner components of the proximal femur, meaning the upper portion of what in lay terms is known as "the thigh bone."
The photos of Jazz Jennings you've cited from Instagram and from a Huff Post puff piece published in 2016 don't persuade me that Jazz "has a female skeletal structure" either.
Scans of Jazz's skeleton like the full body bone scans (skeletal scintigraphy) of the sort seen in the link below - now that would be another story.
BTW, in the nearly 7 years since the Huff Post puff piece about Jazz Jennings you cite was published, Jazz's life hasn't turned out very well.
Following surgical amputation of the poor kid's penis and testicles and botched attempts to create surgically-constructed body parts Jazz was misled to believe would be convincing approximations of a vagina and vulva, Jazz's physical and mental health have gone in the toilet. Jazz is now a morbidly obsese, extremely unhappy young adult of 22 with severe depression, chronic anxiety, an eating disorder and a heart condition who doesn't have a libido, is permanently sterile, and has been robbed of the physical capacity to have an orgasm, ever. Jazz's TV show also makes it clear that Jazz is socially, developmentally, cognitively and intellectually delayed or at least out of step relative to most of Jazz's peers; and that Jazz has difficulty with many aspects of normal adult functioning. On top of all that, Jazz is a tortured soul who frequently breaks down in tears and and says things like, "I never feel like myself."
But since you brought up Jazz Jennings: given how much medical intervention Jazz and other young males like Jazz have been subjected to, and over a great many years too - and given all the big money, institutional backing, MSM endorsements, and popuar support behind "youth gender medicine" and "child transition" - it always strikes me as odd that there isn't already a whole slew of published medical case reports and cohort studies of these young people that document in detail how they have physically developed year by year and can back up the extraordinary claims you and posters like Hobby Jogger make about them.
If the hormone treatments that male trans-identified youngsters like Jazz have been subjected to really have yielded all the miraculous physical effects you and posters like Hobby Jogger claim - and it really were true that males deprived of testosterone and regularly given large doses of Big Pharma estrogen in adolescence have no unfair advantage in girls' & women's sports because they have developed to be physically identical or nearly identical to females in all the ways that matter in sports - then there should be plenty of published papers in medical and scientific journals showing this. And all you and Hobby Jogger would have to do is copy & paste links to those papers.
But instead of pointing to the published papers showing that these males are now endowed with female skeletons, Q angles and bone structure like you say - and with other physical characteristics that perhaps could be used to justify their inclusion in girls' and women's sports too, like female hearts, lungs, cardivovascular capacity, breathing mechanics, tendons, muscle fibers, hormone profiles and cycles, grip strength, punching power, dura thickness, neck microarchitercture, height, and so on - all that you and posters like Hobby Jogger can do is keep making unsubstantiated claims that to me and many others just seem like wishful thinking.
No transwomen even play in the WBNA, maybe her opinion isn't the most valid since she isn't affected.
Her point is that the bigger problem for female athletes is that their very legitimacy is not respected and that politics around trans-athletes is a lousy proxy for respecting women's athletics.
If you had any self awareness at all you might realize that your dismissing her opinion without any apparent attempt to hear it is literally what she's talking about.
Nope, learn to read. I said gametes provide the basis for sex differentiation, so obviously someone who has their balls or ovaries cut out are not suddenly sexless. SRY gene, which acts as a transcription factor to act on genes to code for male sex characteristics and prevent female sex characteristics. It's literally called the Sex Determining Region y protein.
Also, SRY gene expression does not vary on a "continuum." Intersex conditions involving the SRY gene are either the result of SRY-variants and are not the result of original SRY-gene expression (Swyer syndrome), or the translocation of the SRY gene from the Y chromosome to an X chromosome (46 XX). So the presence or lack thereof of the Sex Determining Region Y Protein (SRY) Gene does determine sex, and there are no third sexes.
The words below are literally your words that you are adjusting now. There are tons of threads where a number of us have given your counter examples to karyotype based binary sex classification as well. This loopy conversation isn’t interesting to me, so have a good one.
”No it doesn't. Sexual DImorphism is based on the existence of TWO sex gametes. There are male gametes (sperm) and female gametes (eggs). Your genetics determine which one of these two gametes your body is designed to be able to produce. As soon as someone can provide evidence for the existence of a third gamete, then the sex binary can be challenged”
Thank you for further clarifying what I've been saying all along. Your reading comprehension is in desperate need of work, however, because nothing I have said contradicts itself.
"Sexual DImorphism is based on the existence of TWO sex gametes" = there are TWO sexes, male and female, because there are TWO gametes, sperm and egg.
"Your genetics determine which one of these two gametes your body is designed to be able to produce" = the presence, or lack thereof, of an SRY-gene determines whether you develop into a male or female.
I never said the production of one gamete or the other determines which sex you are, because if you happen not to produce gametes you aren't somehow sexless. Your genotypic sex determines which gametes you produce. Glad I could clear things up for you.
No transwomen even play in the WBNA, maybe her opinion isn't the most valid since she isn't affected.
Her point is that the bigger problem for female athletes is that their very legitimacy is not respected and that politics around trans-athletes is a lousy proxy for respecting women's athletics.
If you had any self awareness at all you might realize that your dismissing her opinion without any apparent attempt to hear it is literally what she's talking about.
True, female sports are not as popular or profitable as their male counterparts. I can agree with that premise. Letting men compete in women's sports would further reduce their legitimacy, in fact female sports would cease to exist if that were the case. Dealing with these issues are not mutually exclusive.
So you have posted those stories of Lupron compromising the patients' physical abilities including the ability to play sports.
Is this effect only limited to natal females who take this medicine? Or does the same negative effect happen to natal males? If not, why?
If it also happens to natal males, then what happen to their ability to play sports? Do they still have advantage over natal females in spite of this side effect? If that's what you are suggesting, how that can be proved?
What exactly are you trying to claim regarding this medicine's impact on one's ability to play sports?
I posted stories about the myriad negative effects that Lupron has on the females who have taken these drugs at different ages and stages of development for different reasons - clinically precocious puberty in little girls who start sexually developing as early as 3, 4, 5 and 6; endometriosis in adolescent girls and grown women; uterine fibroids in older women - simply to refute the false claims made in the headline and body of the VICE article you posted.
In case you forgot, the headline of the VICE article said: "Hm, No One Had a Problem With Puberty Blockers When Only Cis Kids Took Them"
And the quote in the article that you chose to copy & paste in your post said that the use of GnRHa drugs for various different health conditions "has been FDA approved, well-studied, well-documented, and well-tolerated for a long time now."
The articles I shared - along with the testimony of thousands of women; the tens of thousands of reports of adverse effects made to the FDA; and the reams of evidence given in court and in professional talks by longstanding medical experts in endometriosis like David Redwine, MD - show that the claims made in the VICE article are total BS.
Patients and many people concerned about, and expert in, women's and children's health in particular have been sounding the alarm about the drawbacks and longtem health damage associated with Lupron and other GnRH analog drugs for decades. I first heard of them in the 1990s.
The problems with Lupron and other GnRHa drugs have been widely reported in the mainstream press over the years too.
Last year, the problems caused by Lupron and the other GnRHa drugs that are used as "puberty blockers" made headline news again when the FDA issued a warning that they may cause brain swelling, disabling headaches, vision disturbances, and permanent blindness in children to whom they are administered.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration added a warning to gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, commonly known as “puberty blockers,” indicating there were serious risks for youth who take them.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) identified six cases in females between the ages of 5 and 12, who were taking GnRH agonists, which presented “a plausible association between GnRH agonist use and pseudotumor cerebri.”
Pseudotumor cerebri, also known as idiopathic intracranial hypertension, occurs when the pressure inside your skull spontaneously increases, which can cause brain swelling, severe headaches, nausea, double vision, and even permanent vision loss, according to the Mayo Clinic.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration added a warning to gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, commonly known as “puberty blockers
Moreover, if you look into the history of Lupron and other GnRHa drugs, you'll find that many patients with the male-only health condition that these drugs were initially used to treat, and for which the FDA first approved Lupron, have had trouble tolerating these drugs too. Even older men past 65 with advanced, potentially fatal prostate cancer have found some of the "side effects" of Lupron and other GnRHa drugs too disagreeable or downright horrible for them to take.
Given how often and strongly you promote using GnRHa drugs as "puberty blockers" to stunt the normal, natural development of kids confused and distressed about sex and gender issues in part because they've been told the cruel, self-esteem-destroying lie that they were somehow "born in the wrong body," I'm surprised you're so completely in the dark about the well-documented harms of these drugs.
This post was edited 6 minutes after it was posted.
The main purpose of the article was not at all about studying bone density problems. The main purpose of the article is clearly stated in the title, described in the abstract, and discussed throughout the article. The purpose was to see if hip bone geometry of transgender people would resemble the gender into which they transitioned if implemented in early puberty. And, this study clearly stated that it did.
"In both trans women and trans men, participants resembled the reference curve for SPW and ED of the experienced gender but only when GnRHa was started during early puberty. Those who started during mid and late puberty remained within the reference curve of the gender assigned at birth. A possible explanation might be sought in the phenomenon of programming, which conceptualizes that stimuli during critical windows of development can have major consequences throughout one's life span."
"This study demonstrated that participants starting the GnRHa treatment in early puberty resemble the change in subperiosteal width and endocortical diameter of the experienced gender during GAH"
"Participants in our current study, starting in mid or late puberty, acquired bone geometry more closely resembling the reference curve of the gender assigned at birth. This illustrates that the main effect of testosterone and estrogen on periosteal and endocortical bone growth occurs during early puberty."
Before puberty, the female and male skeletal structures are very similar. Changes to the skeletal structures are a result of the sex hormones that are produced during puberty. This is not that complicated. If trans women are given estrogen during puberty, then their bone structure will be altered to resemble females. You can easily look at photos of Jazz Jennings and tell that she has a female skeletal structure
Like I said before, if you have evidence proving that sex/gender-confused male children put on GnRHa drugs aka "puberty blockers" as pre-teens, followed by estrogen fairly soon after, go on to develop "a"female skeletal structure" like you claim - including female-shaped pelvises and female Q angles - I will be glad to look at it. If I am wrong, I'll admit it.
But just copying & pasting additional sections from the same paper you linked to the first place isn't convinving evidence.
Also, I already read that paper in full the first time!I And it's not about hip geometry, pelvis shape, or skeletal structure. It's about the outer layer and one of the core inner components of the proximal femur, meaning the upper portion of what in lay terms is known as "the thigh bone."
The photos of Jazz Jennings you've cited from Instagram and from a Huff Post puff piece published in 2016 don't persuade me that Jazz "has a female skeletal structure" either.
Scans of Jazz's skeleton like the full body bone scans (skeletal scintigraphy) of the sort seen in the link below - now that would be another story.
BTW, in the nearly 7 years since the Huff Post puff piece about Jazz Jennings you cite was published, Jazz's life hasn't turned out very well.
Following surgical amputation of the poor kid's penis and testicles and botched attempts to create surgically-constructed body parts Jazz was misled to believe would be convincing approximations of a vagina and vulva, Jazz's physical and mental health have gone in the toilet. Jazz is now a morbidly obsese, extremely unhappy young adult of 22 with severe depression, chronic anxiety, an eating disorder and a heart condition who doesn't have a libido, is permanently sterile, and has been robbed of the physical capacity to have an orgasm, ever. Jazz's TV show also makes it clear that Jazz is socially, developmentally, cognitively and intellectually delayed or at least out of step relative to most of Jazz's peers; and that Jazz has difficulty with many aspects of normal adult functioning. On top of all that, Jazz is a tortured soul who frequently breaks down in tears and and says things like, "I never feel like myself."
But since you brought up Jazz Jennings: given how much medical intervention Jazz and other young males like Jazz have been subjected to, and over a great many years too - and given all the big money, institutional backing, MSM endorsements, and popuar support behind "youth gender medicine" and "child transition" - it always strikes me as odd that there isn't already a whole slew of published medical case reports and cohort studies of these young people that document in detail how they have physically developed year by year and can back up the extraordinary claims you and posters like Hobby Jogger make about them.
If the hormone treatments that male trans-identified youngsters like Jazz have been subjected to really have yielded all the miraculous physical effects you and posters like Hobby Jogger claim - and it really were true that males deprived of testosterone and regularly given large doses of Big Pharma estrogen in adolescence have no unfair advantage in girls' & women's sports because they have developed to be physically identical or nearly identical to females in all the ways that matter in sports - then there should be plenty of published papers in medical and scientific journals showing this. And all you and Hobby Jogger would have to do is copy & paste links to those papers.
But instead of pointing to the published papers showing that these males are now endowed with female skeletons, Q angles and bone structure like you say - and with other physical characteristics that perhaps could be used to justify their inclusion in girls' and women's sports too, like female hearts, lungs, cardivovascular capacity, breathing mechanics, tendons, muscle fibers, hormone profiles and cycles, grip strength, punching power, dura thickness, neck microarchitercture, height, and so on - all that you and posters like Hobby Jogger can do is keep making unsubstantiated claims that to me and many others just seem like wishful thinking.
lol, someone is very angry and defensive! I provided a link to a peer-reviewed article that studied the hip bone geometry of people who transitioned in early puberty. The study did not look a Q angle or the overall shape of the pelvis. However, one can surmise that if transitioning in early puberty alters hip bone geometry (one of the most sexually differentiated aspect of the human skeletal structure) so that they fall within reference range of the gender into which they transition, that other aspects of their skeletal structure will also be altered. This is not surprising given the fact that levels of estrogen and testosterone that are produced (or taken synthetically) during puberty are what is responsible for the secondary sex characteristics of women and men.
Your derogatory comments and extreme level of anger and hostility toward Jazz Jennings, a young trans woman, who comes across to any sane person as a typical young woman speak for themselves. You are seething in anti-male and anti-trans hatred.
No transwoman has ever played in WNBA. No transwoman has ever played in D1 NCAA women's basketball. So it's not the most pressing issue.
But is it a pressing issue in track & field? How many trans women have competed in World Athletics Championships? How many in USATF? ZERO.
It's not even a pressing issue in swimming. There was ZERO trans swimmer in last month's NCAA Championships. There will be ZERO in this summer's US trial for the World Championships.
I am not "obsessed" by any means. It's people who start threads like this who are obsessed.
You're arguing to include biological males in female sport. The precise numbers or relative success of those biological males is entirely irrelevant; sporting bodies either protect the female category in sport or they don't. If nothing else, gender dysphoria referrals have skyrocketed in many places (over 1400% in my country- and that figure doesn't include the massive waiting list). Anyone with a hint of foresight can see where the erosion of the female category plus a massive increase in biological males identifying as women leads. The 2016 Rio 800m women's podium is an apt example of what happens when biological males are allowed to compete with females.
Right. We need to proactive. That's why World Athletics introduced a new rule even before a single trans athlete participated in the World Athletics Championships. Rio 800m will never happen again unless the new policy is overturned by CAS. (BTW, why do people keep conflating the DSD issue with transgender issue? None of the three medalists in Rio was transgender.)
But that is not enough for people on this board. The WA policy is not strict enough for scholastic sports in the US, which we need to take more seriously than the Olympics because.... because of what? I have not heard any reason for that. They just need to be more exclusive than the Olympics just because.
No one has presented any evidence that trans women who started their medical transition before puberty have advantage over cis women. That's why neither World Athletics nor World Aquatics excluded them from the competition. One poster even admitted he didn't know the science behind it, and continued to argue on the assumption that such advantage exists. No, it is not about competitive advantage for some people. They just have visceral objection no matter what.
And before you mention 1400% increase (I guess that's from UK), you have to look at what the actual number before the increase, and over what period that increase happened, and whether the number is still increasing. My understanding of the UK figure is that it had leveled off in mid 2010s, and increased again last year after temporary decrease during Covid. (The Economist cover story on April 5th). And just look at the total numbers. It is still less than 4000 a year. What percentage of the age group population is that?
I don't know much about youth sports in UK, but are podiums in girls' sports swept by trans athletes? I haven't heard any news about that.
Oh, I forgot. It's not about numbers. It's not about podiums and medals. It's not about competitive advantage.
If the hormone treatments that male trans-identified youngsters like Jazz have been subjected to really have yielded all the miraculous physical effects you and posters like Hobby Jogger claim - and it really were true that males deprived of testosterone and regularly given large doses of Big Pharma estrogen in adolescence have no unfair advantage in girls' & women's sports because they have developed to be physically identical or nearly identical to females in all the ways that matter in sports - then there should be plenty of published papers in medical and scientific journals showing this. And all you and Hobby Jogger would have to do is copy & paste links to those papers.
Again, you have failed Statistics 101 miserably. It is IMPOSSIBLE to publish a paper that claims to have proved that there is no statistically significant difference between two groups. You are asking for something that could never exist on this earth.
BTW, most trans people who started early medical transition do not expose their private lives in a reality TV show in the way Jazz Jennings has done. No wonder they don't face the same problems she does.
So you have posted those stories of Lupron compromising the patients' physical abilities including the ability to play sports.
Is this effect only limited to natal females who take this medicine? Or does the same negative effect happen to natal males? If not, why?
If it also happens to natal males, then what happen to their ability to play sports? Do they still have advantage over natal females in spite of this side effect? If that's what you are suggesting, how that can be proved?
What exactly are you trying to claim regarding this medicine's impact on one's ability to play sports?
I posted stories about the myriad negative effects that Lupron has on the females who have taken these drugs at different ages and stages of development for different reasons - clinically precocious puberty in little girls who start sexually developing as early as 3, 4, 5 and 6; endometriosis in adolescent girls and grown women; uterine fibroids in older women - simply to refute the false claims made in the headline and body of the VICE article you posted.
In case you forgot, the headline of the VICE article said: "Hm, No One Had a Problem With Puberty Blockers When Only Cis Kids Took Them"
And the quote in the article that you chose to copy & paste in your post said that the use of GnRHa drugs for various different health conditions "has been FDA approved, well-studied, well-documented, and well-tolerated for a long time now."
The articles I shared - along with the testimony of thousands of women; the tens of thousands of reports of adverse effects made to the FDA; and the reams of evidence given in court and in professional talks by longstanding medical experts in endometriosis like David Redwine, MD - show that the claims made in the VICE article are total BS.
Patients and many people concerned about, and expert in, women's and children's health in particular have been sounding the alarm about the drawbacks and longtem health damage associated with Lupron and other GnRH analog drugs for decades. I first heard of them in the 1990s.
The problems with Lupron and other GnRHa drugs have been widely reported in the mainstream press over the years too.
Last year, the problems caused by Lupron and the other GnRHa drugs that are used as "puberty blockers" made headline news again when the FDA issued a warning that they may cause brain swelling, disabling headaches, vision disturbances, and permanent blindness in children to whom they are administered.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration added a warning to gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, commonly known as “puberty blockers,” indicating there were serious risks for youth who take them.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) identified six cases in females between the ages of 5 and 12, who were taking GnRH agonists, which presented “a plausible association between GnRH agonist use and pseudotumor cerebri.”
Pseudotumor cerebri, also known as idiopathic intracranial hypertension, occurs when the pressure inside your skull spontaneously increases, which can cause brain swelling, severe headaches, nausea, double vision, and even permanent vision loss, according to the Mayo Clinic.
Moreover, if you look into the history of Lupron and other GnRHa drugs, you'll find that many patients with the male-only health condition that these drugs were initially used to treat, and for which the FDA first approved Lupron, have had trouble tolerating these drugs too. Even older men past 65 with advanced, potentially fatal prostate cancer have found some of the "side effects" of Lupron and other GnRHa drugs too disagreeable or downright horrible for them to take.
Given how often and strongly you promote using GnRHa drugs as "puberty blockers" to stunt the normal, natural development of kids confused and distressed about sex and gender issues in part because they've been told the cruel, self-esteem-destroying lie that they were somehow "born in the wrong body," I'm surprised you're so completely in the dark about the well-documented harms of these drugs.
And you didn't provide a single answer to my questions on the effect of puberty blockers on sports performance. I asked you to provide evidence that it did NOT have negative effect on sports performance. Instead, what you have provided was anecdotes on how they have negative effect. If you can accumulate more cases, you can actually prove the exact opposite of what you are claiming. You are very good at undermining your own argument.
(BTW, why do people keep conflating the DSD issue with transgender issue? None of the three medalists in Rio was transgender.)
Because both Lia Thomas and Caster Semenya are biological males who dominated in female sport. And yes, one of them grew up under the wrong impression about their sex for a while because of an underdeveloped penis. The other is shamelessly invading female sport for some narcissistic reason or other.
Your other point about school sport, take a look at all of the children's world records. I think every single track and field record for every age (minus a single high jump category I think) is held by a boy. When you break each event into that many categories we're talking about hundreds of records here, way beyond reasonable doubt about a non-biological cause. Whether that's because of the testosterone boost in womb/newborn boys or some other biological reason, the records speak for themselves- you can't explain it away with socialisation either as all it would take is one exceptional girl with massively competitive parents to sweep at least some records, and there are no shortage of those girls, they just can't compete. Yes, they are trying hard enough. As age increases, the disparity only widens and so, yes, even girls taking part in school sport should have the dignity of competing within their own protected category.
No transwomen even play in the WBNA, maybe her opinion isn't the most valid since she isn't affected.
Her point is that the bigger problem for female athletes is that their very legitimacy is not respected and that politics around trans-athletes is a lousy proxy for respecting women's athletics.
If you had any self awareness at all you might realize that your dismissing her opinion without any apparent attempt to hear it is literally what she's talking about.
What's really disturbing to me is that all those "defenders of women's sports" magically disappear as soon as there is no trans or intersex athlete involved. It seems that the actual concerns held by female athletes are not important to them. They just want to use female athletes to promote their agenda.
I wish they show even a fraction of interest in the structural issues that hold women back in sports. But unfortunately that's not likely to happen.
Because both Lia Thomas and Caster Semenya are biological males who dominated in female sport. And yes, one of them grew up under the wrong impression about their sex for a while because of an underdeveloped penis. The other is shamelessly invading female sport for some narcissistic reason or other.
And Lia Thomas is not eligible to swim in any event sanctioned by World Aquatics or USA Swimming. Caster Semenya is not eligible to compete in any event sanctioned by World Athletics unless she lowers her blood t-level to under 2.5 nmol/L. (She was barely under 2 min and was eliminated in the semifinal when the upper limit was 10 nmol/L.)
So do we have to worry about Thomas winning another race? Do we have to worry about Semenya winning another race? If not, why do we need to talk like it is an ongoing crisis?
Your other point about school sport, take a look at all of the children's world records. I think every single track and field record for every age (minus a single high jump category I think) is held by a boy. When you break each event into that many categories we're talking about hundreds of records here, way beyond reasonable doubt about a non-biological cause. Whether that's because of the testosterone boost in womb/newborn boys or some other biological reason, the records speak for themselves- you can't explain it away with socialisation either as all it would take is one exceptional girl with massively competitive parents to sweep at least some records, and there are no shortage of those girls, they just can't compete. Yes, they are trying hard enough. As age increases, the disparity only widens and so, yes, even girls taking part in school sport should have the dignity of competing within their own protected category.
The comparison of performances between prepuberty kids is not the same as the comparison of performances between cisgender girls and transgender girls on puberty blocker or hormone replacement. The latter has to take into account the negative side effects of puberty blocker on athletic performance. Just look at the anecdotes that RunRagged provided to undermine her own argument.
And Lia Thomas is not eligible to swim in any event sanctioned by World Aquatics or USA Swimming. Caster Semenya is not eligible to compete in any event sanctioned by World Athletics unless she lowers her blood t-level to under 2.5 nmol/L. (She was barely under 2 min and was eliminated in the semifinal when the upper limit was 10 nmol/L.)
So do we have to worry about Thomas winning another race? Do we have to worry about Semenya winning another race? If not, why do we need to talk like it is an ongoing crisis?
World Athletics have certainly made the correct (and unexpected) decision to protect the category, but many other sporting bodies have either gone full throttle down the gender inclusion path, or introduced some fudge that tries to 'balance' a conflict that cannot be realistically accommodated. What this means for the Olympics is anyone's guess, particularly for those sports that allow switching categories through a non-binary option. The 'ongoing crisis' element and notable backlash to gender ideology in the UK is likely the factor that swayed Coe's hand for the WA decision, as a previous press release suggested a fudge was being introduced.
