World Medical Association (WMA) urges its Members not to adminster testosterone-lowering drugs in females with DSDs

Good...... Just let the athletes compete against other athletes with the same condition.

In semenya's case, all natural females that are scheduled to compete against her (at ANY race length) should boycott or walk off the track. It's that simple.

"I’ve been told that Rojo rimmed Caster’s ring whilst inserting his micro penis into her man hole."

What is the point of a post like this? Who benefits in any way from stuff like this appearing on this site?

The WMA has made several very valid points about the Semenya case - points which Lord Coe and the IAAF have so far made no attempt to answer. Will any qualified medical people be willing to administer the relevant drugs to Semenya? Aren't there ethical questions about prescribing drugs to an individual, not for any health reason but simply to enable that individual to compete in a sport?

Will any female athlete who is clearly the best at their event be subject to the same scrutiny (harassment?) as Semenya or will it merely be those that don't live up to a certain, traditional, view of what a woman should look like?

Dr. Alan Quartermain wrote:

Good...... Just let the athletes compete against other athletes with the same condition.

In semenya's case, all natural females that are scheduled to compete against her (at ANY race length) should boycott or walk off the track. It's that simple.

I notice that the WMA says it has "ethical reservations", not medical reservations. It has thus entered the politics of the debate. On the wrong side. It has no apparent reservations about the huge increase in the last ten years of its members providing prescriptions for TRT. So, some hormone therapy is fine - if it doesn't conflict with the ideology driving the gender debate. Perhaps the ethics of sport are a little outside the WMA purview.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Dr. Alan Quartermain wrote:

Good...... Just let the athletes compete against other athletes with the same condition.

In semenya's case, all natural females that are scheduled to compete against her (at ANY race length) should boycott or walk off the track. It's that simple.

I notice that the WMA says it has "ethical reservations", not medical reservations. It has thus entered the politics of the debate. On the wrong side. It has no apparent reservations about the huge increase in the last ten years of its members providing prescriptions for TRT. So, some hormone therapy is fine - if it doesn't conflict with the ideology driving the gender debate. Perhaps the ethics of sport are a little outside the WMA purview.

Trudat

Do they have the same the same concerns about prescribing these drugs to a mentally ill man (gender dysphoria) who says he wants to be a female? Why is it accepted in that case but not the other?

Naturally, if a person wishes to change their gender designated at birth, it is an autonomous decision; if you are being forced to administer medication that dimishes your sense of self and comes with side-effects, that is deeply problematic.

LDoc wrote:

I have to wonder wrote:

Do they have the same the same concerns about prescribing these drugs to a mentally ill man (gender dysphoria) who says he wants to be a female? Why is it accepted in that case but not the other?

Naturally, if a person wishes to change their gender designated at birth, it is an autonomous decision; if you are being forced to administer medication that dimishes your sense of self and comes with side-effects, that is deeply problematic.

Well, it would be if you are being forced to do it. But who is being forced here? It still remains a choice.

Armstronglivs wrote:

LDoc wrote:

Naturally, if a person wishes to change their gender designated at birth, it is an autonomous decision; if you are being forced to administer medication that dimishes your sense of self and comes with side-effects, that is deeply problematic.

Well, it would be if you are being forced to do it. But who is being forced here? It still remains a choice.

That is hugely naive. There is a huge difference between 'choice' and coercion.

Most of these simpletons see black and white, with very little room for shades of gray. Nuance completely escapes them. It is obvious that the IAAF has no clue how to navigate this thorny issue but their solution is so ethically abhorrent that most intelligence people recoil from it in utter disgust.

The WMA had previously expressed its opposition to medically prescribing treatment to lower testosterone if the condition was not recognised as pathological.

Lowering testosterone (in males) is a common prostate cancer treatment (it helps prevent metastasization).

As further evidence, one of the main treatments for prostate cancer — hormone therapy — slows cancer growth by lowering testosterone levels in the body. The belief that testosterone fuels prostate cancer growth has led many doctors to avoid prescribing testosterone therapy for men who have a history of prostate cancer.

LDoc wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Well, it would be if you are being forced to do it. But who is being forced here? It still remains a choice.

That is hugely naive. There is a huge difference between 'choice' and coercion.

You fail to understand the word coercion. Semenya is not being compelled to undertake hormone therapy. She can choose not to. But if she chooses to continue to race in the 800-1500 it is a requirement. But neither is she being compelled to compete. Her choices may be difficult or unenviable - but many choices in life are. But she is still free to make those choices. That is not coercion.

jiaaf wrote:

Most of these simpletons see black and white, with very little room for shades of gray. Nuance completely escapes them. It is obvious that the IAAF has no clue how to navigate this thorny issue but their solution is so ethically abhorrent that most intelligence people recoil from it in utter disgust.

Actually they don't. It is only ethically abhorrent to competitors in female sport with male chromosomes and testes.

Armstronglivs wrote:

jiaaf wrote:

Most of these simpletons see black and white, with very little room for shades of gray. Nuance completely escapes them. It is obvious that the IAAF has no clue how to navigate this thorny issue but their solution is so ethically abhorrent that most intelligence people recoil from it in utter disgust.

Actually they don't. It is only ethically abhorrent to competitors in female sport with male chromosomes and testes.

Jiaaf was referring to intelligent people. He was not referring to you.

Here is a legitimate question, Caster has higher levels of testosterone in her system, is this at the expense of estrogen? If so, would MDs prescribe medications that increase estrogen since it would be cardioprotective? I know MDs would decrease testosterone in men if it didn't have the physical and baby-making side-effects--but that's not really a concern for her, right?

data pointer wrote:

The WMA had previously expressed its opposition to medically prescribing treatment to lower testosterone if the condition was not recognised as pathological.

Lowering testosterone (in males) is a common prostate cancer treatment (it helps prevent metastasization).

As further evidence, one of the main treatments for prostate cancer — hormone therapy — slows cancer growth by lowering testosterone levels in the body. The belief that testosterone fuels prostate cancer growth has led many doctors to avoid prescribing testosterone therapy for men who have a history of prostate cancer.

https://www.healthline.com/health/prostate-cancer/testosterone-and-prostate-cancer

...you do realize that cancer is a disease, and therefore a pathological condition.

Because Semenya doesn't want to take drugs in order to continue competing. You can claim she has a choice all you want, but she really doesn't. Her choices are thus: stop pursuing her greatest passion, or be forced take drugs that will forever alter her body and have health risks of their own. The only other choice available to her (continuing to compete without taking drugs) is no longer possible.

gahagand wrote:

Because Semenya doesn't want to take drugs in order to continue competing. You can claim she has a choice all you want, but she really doesn't. Her choices are thus: stop pursuing her greatest passion, or be forced take drugs that will forever alter her body and have health risks of their own. The only other choice available to her (continuing to compete without taking drugs) is no longer possible.

She is free to keep competing. She just can't do so in middle distance races that are restricted to females.

Of course she will no longer be world class if she competes as a male, but since when is anyone guaranteed the right to be world class at their sport?

gahagand wrote:

I have to wonder wrote:

Do they have the same the same concerns about prescribing these drugs to a mentally ill man (gender dysphoria) who says he wants to be a female? Why is it accepted in that case but not the other?

Because Semenya doesn't want to take drugs in order to continue competing. You can claim she has a choice all you want, but she really doesn't. Her choices are thus: stop pursuing her greatest passion, or be forced take drugs that will forever alter her body and have health risks of their own. The only other choice available to her (continuing to compete without taking drugs) is no longer possible.

Actually, Semenya has a choice that other women don't. They are stuck with a level of testosterone that is a fraction of hers and can't be improved short of doping. So despite having a Y chromosome and testes - which 99.9x% of her competition don't, because they are women - she still has the choice to continue to compete as a woman. Most XY with male reproductive organs and male testosterone, as she has, would be normally ineligible for female competition. She also has the alternative choice to compete as a male - because she fulfils the requirements of that category of competition as well.

But no matter how often it is pointed out, she has biological advantages that only males can have. Other women (not including intersex or transgender) don't have those advantages, by virtue of their gender. For her to maintain those advantages, which are enormous - and only one is deemed correctable, and that is her male levels of testosterone - is manifestly unfair to other women. But her defenders remain unconcerned with the fate of women's sport while they fixate on Semenya's alleged victimhood.

Completely agree with this. No one is entitled to compete at the highest level, you have to meet certain requirements. You have to be elite and meet the sex requirements. Anytime you create distinctions (between male and female) you are bound to come up against edge and margin cases. I feel bad for Semenya but so be it, I think having such a rule is better than not having it in order to preserve the integrity of women's sports. Do those of you who are against the ruling believe in any kind of distinction between male and female sports? If so, what should it be based on?

she can compete all she wants wrote:

gahagand wrote:

Because Semenya doesn't want to take drugs in order to continue competing. You can claim she has a choice all you want, but she really doesn't. Her choices are thus: stop pursuing her greatest passion, or be forced take drugs that will forever alter her body and have health risks of their own. The only other choice available to her (continuing to compete without taking drugs) is no longer possible.

She is free to keep competing. She just can't do so in middle distance races that are restricted to females.

Of course she will no longer be world class if she competes as a male, but since when is anyone guaranteed the right to be world class at their sport?