IOC study: Trans women athletes are at a relative disadvantage in many key physical areas relating to athletic ability and perfo

You're giving the researchers who did this study way too much credit when you say they made comparisons "between groups of athletes."

As the Telegraph article noted, to qualify for the study, participants only

had to be taking part in competitive sport or [some kind of] physical training at least three times a week, and the transgender volunteers needed to have undergone hormonal therapy for at least a year. None of the subjects were competing in national or international sport.

Ross Tucker told the Telegraph:

"The transgender women [in the study] have a body fat percentage of 31.6 per cent, the females 26.6 per cent.

“One of those groups would be described as overweight, and the other athletic.

"The females [in the study] are fit and well trained, and the transgender women are well below the same standard. Their physiological capacity suggests untrained.

“I would not be comparing these groups with any expectation that the comparison is like for like."

Good for herm. Most women’s soccer players are washed up at the age of 37. Heck, most are washed up at 32, when they started their professional career. It’s inspiring to see a woman embark on a professional career at such an advanced age. It harkens back to when Renee Richards was able to reach the US Open final at the ripe old age of 43. Stories like this will help inspire young boys everywhere to dream of having long careers in women’s sports.

Do the morons at the IOC not understand the concept of researcher bias?

This study should have never been approved, let alone published.

Also, the “findings” based on recreational-level athletes should not have been applied to elite athletes. It is like driving a Volkswagen Beetle then making judgments on an F1 race car.

I’m actually kinda shocked the IOC would put their stamp of approval on research this transparently scientifically unsound. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that these claims are hardly generalizable or well-founded based on 1) small population sample, 2) limitations of convenience sampling (sign up from a social media post lol), and 3) the fact that most of the results cherry-picked are hardly statistically significant (p=0.045 when the threshold is p<0.05). This needs to be examined with legitimate athletes in a study with actual scientific principles lmao

Science education funding is important guys.

The study needs to compare and contrast elite level females with same level and sport trans athletes.

For example, Lia Thomas and the females in the NCAA swim final which Thomas won need to be compared.

I'll summarize as, "Study compares apples and oranges; concludes they are different fruits."

Ground breaking.

You're citing MSNBC as your "source"?

Sounds like the transphobes here including the mods are really threatened by alternate opinions that don’t violate any guidelines.

Best indicator of insularity and irrelevance.

It is not about "unfair advantage." None other than rojo has already made it clear.

But I don't care if she has an unfair advantage. If Thomas was #305 as a woman, I still wouldn't want 'her' in the women's division. Thomas is a biological male. Male/female divisions in sports exist because of biology - not gender. "She" is in the wrong category - end of story.

Is anyone saying that this post should be removed, that supporters should be banned, that the leader of the study should be launched into the sun?

Or are we just pointing out the myriad of reasons why the study is baloney, purposely arranged and carried out to produce the result the lead researcher obviously wanted to arise?

BJSM has turned into a not so good journal...

Women just need to do better to beat them. Since women are equal to men there is no inherit biological advantage to being male.

Of course, I called exactly this attitude akin to “religion” in post #5 that the mods conveniently deleted.

Here is post #5 from my memory. I’m confident you disagree with the post, but you honestly think of all the things that are left standing on these threads, this is too much to stay standing?

”For the transphobes that abound here, it is not about performance analysis data, but a belief in gamete or karyotype supremacy or the like, sort of like religion where the buck stops at an asserted belief in God as the ultimate self evident truth, but they like to call it science or biology or something.”

got them little packages flopping around slowing their stride and weighing them down!

Are studies actually needed. This seems like something James Lindsay talks about. Studies nobody can understand that causes one to question what he can see with his own eyes.

i think he calls it “ demoralization “

False. You don’t need a large study to have meaningful results. Look at a nomogram for sample size and power and 44 individuals could certainly be more than enough, depending on the effect size and desired power.