Margaret Wambui defies testosterone ruling, suspended from Stockholm Diamond League:

Or just have a human category. Anyone can compete in it. No difficulties, no problems. The best athletes get the fame and the prices

caller out of B.S. wrote:

Not normal wrote:

The average for women is around 0.7.

So ... if you test at higher than the IAAF limit, ain't nothing remotely normal about you. And you are not an XX woman.

One of Renato's Chinese male marathoners had a .7...

Bull S*** Show us the documentation. Lier.

run with the wom wrote:

caller out of B.S. wrote:

One of Renato's Chinese male marathoners had a .7...

Bull S*** Show us the documentation. Lier.

OK, I was incorrect. The correct number is actually .8322

You Renato apologists really need to stop with this. I have the documentation. I don't make claims I cannot back up (unlike Renato).

Renato posted the following data line for Ding Changqin

Date WBC RBC Hgb Hct MCV MCH MCHC RDW PLT Iron Ferrit. Urea CK Test.

25.08+ 4.80 5.04 14.9 41.5 82.2 29.5 358 13.5 137 7.36 293 24.03

When I pointed out that the hemoglobin, red blood cells and hematocrit were both very much on the high side and were a remarkable uptick from the previous tests in the series, his response was that these results had been confused for the results of Su Guogxiong and the results were not out of line. When pointed out that the testosterone could not possible be from a male's blood test, he then claimed that the Chinese measured testosterone using a completely different system. This is measured in ng/dl, but you can easily convert is to nmol/l (which the IAAF uses) based on the website below. This is easily seen by looking for the complete set of numbers he has posted for that camp in Duoba. It comes to .8332 nmol/l, which is the normal range for a woman, but completely inconceivable for a healthy male. It would take extreme hypogonadism to cause numbers like that.

So Renato just flat out lied to attribute that entire line of numbers to Su Guogxiong to cover for the fact that Ding (a convicted doper) had readings that were in line with doping and not in line with natural variance. Then he lied again to try to cover up that he just gave his male marathoner testicular cancer. Oh what a twisted web we weave...

It's amazing the lengths Renato will go to cover up the doping in his camp and it is even more amazing that people here are willing to swallow whatever he gives out. He posted the numbers here on Letsrun. This is all verifiable. All it takes is somebody who is actually willing to look in depth at the numbers. Sorry you would rather be a fanboy.

When he began posting on this board years ago and mentioned blood tests he had administered, I was suspect. Why was he testing blood in a small village in the middle of nowhere?

Pretty obvious to me...

Wambui, Semenya and Niyombosa are now all confirmed to be XY DSD.

Tell me why again I am a bad person because I can tell just by looking at them they are not biological women.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Wambui is reportedly DSD, which means a Y, or male, chromosome. That is why her testosterone levels are so high.

Therefore, he's a DSD Y chromosome Male, like Semenya.

Both of whom should be banned from competing in women's events.

why fraudulent? wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Ha! So Wambui just out him/herself. So stupid. These people are addicted to the money, but they were getting money via purely fraudulent means.

Is there any evidence that Wambui has testicles or a Y chromosome?

Should Sebastian Coe have been banned when he ran 1:41 because he was so much better than everyone else? Is it fraudulent to have better genes?

What if Wambui is a woman, no Y chromosome, no testicles, and just happens to produce more testosterone than what is normal for a woman her age?

The court of arbitration in sport ruled that the testosterone limit only applies to XY individuals.

dingle wrote:

I would use the term genetically male if one really needed to identify the sex. Biologically male is probably harder to define clearly, but would generally mean having a penis and testes and that isn't the case for all 46XY people. There are cases of 46XY people having fully developed ovaries.

Good point. Thanks for the clarification.

Drainthefecesswamp wrote:

The court of arbitration in sport ruled that the testosterone limit only applies to XY individuals.

who are attempting to compete as Y chromosome Males in XX chromosome women's events.

new categories? wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

"Why? Why don’t we take maybe men with low testosterone and categorize them as women?”

Why not scrap gender classes for competition and replace them with testosterone classes? Seems like a fairer way of sorting out competition classes....

how about as both sexes are equal just having 1 race with both sexes

radical feminist wrote:

how about as both sexes are equal just having 1 race with both sexes

How about NO, because XX women are not men, and Y chromosome men are not women.

why fraudulent? wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Ha! So Wambui just outed him/herself. So stupid. These people are addicted to the money, but they were getting money via purely fraudulent means.

Is there any evidence that Wambui has testicles or a Y chromosome?

Should Sebastian Coe have been banned when he ran 1:41 because he was so much better than everyone else? Is it fraudulent to have better genes?

What if Wambui is a woman, no Y chromosome, no testicles, and just happens to produce more testosterone than what is normal for a woman her age?

Well if you read the fine print the testosterone limitations only apply to those carrying XY chromosomes. If Wambui is XX this wouldn't apply. Wambui is a fraud depriving real women of hard earned medals.

Banana Bread wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

“I am very disappointed; I don’t feel even like going on with the training because you don’t know what you are training for. Why, when you have a high level of testosterone in men, you are likely to perform well and we celebrate that? But when it comes to women we have to tell them to lower it and we draw them out of the competition.

"Why? Why don’t we take maybe men with low testosterone and categorize them as women?”

Not very bright.

This made me chuckle. I wonder if Semenya looked cute and like a proper girl would she have been accepted by Coe. If she still managed to be attractive I bet she wouldn't have been banned.

1000%. Race for sure has an impact here. If not in the actual decision making process of the IAAF but definitely in how people react and what they say. I'm sure white sprinters have super high T but that isn't up for discussion right now. I hope the affected women continue to fight this and do well if they compete over/under their wanted distance.

No matter where you come down on this, just don't be offensive/ignorant. It's not funny to call a woman a man. Leave that thought in your head.

NERunner053 wrote:

Banana Bread wrote:

This made me chuckle. I wonder if Semenya looked cute and like a proper girl would she have been accepted by Coe. If she still managed to be attractive I bet she wouldn't have been banned.

1000%. Race for sure has an impact here. If not in the actual decision making process of the IAAF but definitely in how people react and what they say. I'm sure white sprinters have super high T but that isn't up for discussion right now. I hope the affected women continue to fight this and do well if they compete over/under their wanted distance.

No matter where you come down on this, just don't be offensive/ignorant. It's not funny to call a woman a man. Leave that thought in your head.

But it is funny calling a man a woman.

dunes runner wrote:

dingle wrote:

I would use the term genetically male if one really needed to identify the sex. Biologically male is probably harder to define clearly, but would generally mean having a penis and testes and that isn't the case for all 46XY people. There are cases of 46XY people having fully developed ovaries.

Good point. Thanks for the clarification.

That is incorrect. XY individuals do not develop ovaries.

Sorry, but you are wrong:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190741/

triathleteguru wrote:

Sorry, but you are wrong:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190741/

And what is the statistical likelihood of this kind of freak mutation occurring? In almost all instances, except cases like, this DSD46XY do not develop ovaries. But then people are sometimes born without certain limbs, or with an extra limb, or organs outside their body. So aberrations, of any kind, can occur, but without significant statistical presence.

why fraudulent? wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Ha! So Wambui just out him/herself. So stupid. These people are addicted to the money, but they were getting money via purely fraudulent means.

Is there any evidence that Wambui has testicles or a Y chromosome?

Should Sebastian Coe have been banned when he ran 1:41 because he was so much better than everyone else? Is it fraudulent to have better genes?

What if Wambui is a woman, no Y chromosome, no testicles, and just happens to produce more testosterone than what is normal for a woman her age?

That's sort of like asking what if Wambui was a woman, normal in every way, except she's 20 feet tall? It might be difficult for me to explain scientifically why she can't actually be both 20 feet tall and normal in other areas, but then again it's not even an issue, because even the most insanely tall woman on earth is nowhere close to that. Same with a woman having 5.0 T and being a typical biological woman in all other ways - it just doesn't happen. Some hypotheticals don't need to be addressed; for instance, we don't have to have rules to govern whether or not women with naturally-developed rocket engines instead of legs can compete.

Not normal wrote:

The IAAF has set the T limit at 5.0nmol/L. That's 60% higher than the 3.0 to 3.1 which is the highest known T for any woman not having a serious disease (tumor growth) that would make her an unlikely candidate for championship athletics.

The average for women is around 0.7.

So ... if you test at higher than the IAAF limit, ain't nothing remotely normal about you. And you are not an XX woman.

So now IAAF has set a maximum allowable T value. Anyone under that value is ok, anyone over, not so. Given that we're not all clones, some competitors may be at the average of 0.7, while some may, in theory be at 4.9. Both are now, according to IAAF rules, perfectly ok to compete against each other in the same event. The 4.9 athlete has a clear advantage over the 0.7 athlete (or we wouldn't be having this discussion) so one has a legal advantage over the other. How long will it be before the 0.7 athlete takes T enhancing drugs to bring them up under the IAAF legal limit of 4.9. The IAAF has opened that door by setting a maximum allowable limit. So taking a performance enhancing drug that, according to IAAF does not give a significant advantage if kept under a certain value, should be perfectly fine. Athletes are already doing this today, with vitamin supplements, thyroid medications, and micro-dosing. Give enough time and every female athlete on the 800m start line will have a 4.99 T value.