Caster Semenya to run 2000m and 3000m ... how does this make sense?

If you read your own source material you would see that Semenya is the opposite of the syndrome that you refer to, which limits testosterone. As she is 46XY with testes she produces testosterone in the normal way. For a male.

Welcome to the 21st Century wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Wrong. Though she identifies as female her chromosome makeup is male. She is 46XY. Like most biological males, it is that - and, like other males, that she has testes - which makes her responsive to androgens and able to produce male levels of testosterone. And that makes her faster than XX women.

Google "Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome" and never post on this issue again until you are informed.

Ignorance is nothing to be proud about.

If you read your own source material you would see that Semenya is the opposite of the syndrome that you refer to, which limits testosterone. As she is 46XY with testes she produces testosterone in the normal way. For a male.

Armstronglivs wrote:

If you read your own source material you would see that Semenya is the opposite of the syndrome that you refer to, which limits testosterone. As she is 46XY with testes she produces testosterone in the normal way. For a male.

Semenya does not have AIS. But it's not her XY chromosome that gives her the advantage. People like you and "1500" refuse to accept this basic science and endlessly rant about her chromosome. For what purpose? To turn the clock and go back to the Dark Age? Maybe you should stop using Internet and post your graffiti on your bathroom wall.

Really curious wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

In response to an earlier question, DSD46XY athletes - as Semenya is - are estimated by the WHO to be 0.01% of the population. Yet the first three athletes in the 800m at Rio were DSD athletes. As the former Olympic swimmer and now BBC commentator Sharron Davies has said, "how can anyone think these athletes don't have an advantage in women's sport?" That advantage won't go away in other events.

Why do you think they only like the 800m?

I don't think they only "like", or are only necessarily suited, to the 800m. According to the IAAF, DSD athletes are 140 times more likely to be found in elite sport than in the general population. That is the advantage they have. It so happens that 3 are currently dominant in the women's 800m.

The 800m is an interesting mixture of the anaerobic with aerobic, and more than the longer events rewards superior strength. To be hyperandrogenic, as these DSD athletes are, would favour their masculinised characteristics. Those features would also help in the shorter events, but would call for more natural speed than Semenya, Nyonsaba and Wambui apparently possess, and their larger and more heavily muscled frames would count against them in the predominantly endurance events. If they were smaller-framed, like an Ayana or Obiri, DSD athletes could also be a force in the longer events, given that males have greater aerobic capacity on average than females, with a higher red blood-cell count. We may yet see this happen when the "right" athlete comes along.

Reading is essential wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

If you read your own source material you would see that Semenya is the opposite of the syndrome that you refer to, which limits testosterone. As she is 46XY with testes she produces testosterone in the normal way. For a male.

Semenya does not have AIS. But it's not her XY chromosome that gives her the advantage. People like you and "1500" refuse to accept this basic science and endlessly rant about her chromosome. For what purpose? To turn the clock and go back to the Dark Age? Maybe you should stop using Internet and post your graffiti on your bathroom wall.

Without the male chromosome she would not have testes and so produce male levels of testosterone. XX athletes do not produce male levels of testosterone - male levels are typically 15-20 times that of females. So her male chromosome is a critical part of her condition. That is the "basic science" that you fail to grasp.

Welcome to the 21st Century wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Wrong. Though she identifies as female her chromosome makeup is male. She is 46XY. Like most biological males, it is that - and, like other males, that she has testes - which makes her responsive to androgens and able to produce male levels of testosterone. And that makes her faster than XX women.

Google "Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome" and never post on this issue again until you are informed.

Ignorance is nothing to be proud about.

I googled it and its pretty clear that Semenya does not have this, her voice alone proves that she went through male puberty.

looks like duck wrote:

Welcome to the 21st Century wrote:

Google "Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome" and never post on this issue again until you are informed.

Ignorance is nothing to be proud about.

I googled it and its pretty clear that Semenya does not have this, her voice alone proves that she went through male puberty.

I never suggested that Semenya had AIS. She clearly does NOT. She probably has 5α-Reductase deficiency, although nothing has been confirmed.

I was pointing out to "1500" that what gives her the advantage is NOT her XY chromosome, but her ability to respond to Androgen. (If she has the ability to respond to androgen that means she does NOT have AIS. How could that be construed as suggesting that she has AIS? That's totally puzzling to me.)

If it is the chromosome that gives her the advantage, then people with AIS will also have the advantage, which they don't. (That's why IAAF clearly states that their policy does NOT apply to anyone with complete AIS.)

And "Armstronglivs" still hasn't explained what is "wrong" about my post.

You're full of it. You refer us to a syndrome that actually doesn't apply to Semenya as part of your argument, and then deny you were implying that it did apply to her.

You also do not understand the difference between a necessary and a sufficient condition. XY chromosomes are necessary to producing male levels of testosterone, as almost all the males on the planet show. Including Semenya - who doesn't have AIS. But in a few very rare exceptions there are those who are XY who do not produce male levels of testosterone. They are androgen insensitive. Statistically they are an insignificant figure. Almost all who are androgen insensitive are XX females. XX females cannot produce male levels of testosterone. So the chromosome is crucial in the production of testosterone but of itself will not always determine the issue in those few rare instances where an individual lacks developed testes or is otherwise androgen insensitive.

DSDXY are estimated by the WHO to be 0.01% of the population. Within that category is the even smaller figure of those DSDXY who are androgen insensitive. They are irrelevant in any discussion about athletes like Semenya, Wambui and Nyobsaba. You are simply wasting our time with spurious and misleading pedantry,

I would not continue any exchange with a know-it-all who adamantly refuses to read what I wrote. If you think you have "won" the debate, great for you. Good luck with your self-gratification.

Welcome to the 21st Century wrote:

I would not continue any exchange with a know-it-all who adamantly refuses to read what I wrote. If you think you have "won" the debate, great for you. Good luck with your self-gratification.

But I think you are clearly an expert at "self-gratification" - if nothing else.

Because AIS manifests itself in different ways. Some who have it only fail to respond to T in the womb as a fetus, but do respond to it later in life once puberty hits, and this go onto develop typical male secondary sexual characteristics ie the physically obvious ones that distinguish males from females.

ncrecuvuer wrote:

MatthewXCountry wrote:

No woman in the past 15 years has ever won a world championship 5k medal owning a PB slower than 14:35.

Indoor 3k is going to be a weaker field so maybe she could win a medal there, but no way Semenya ever gets an outdoor 5k medal. Simply put, 14:35 shape is required for that. With lots of training maybe she could get to 14:50 shape, but that simply is not competitive on the world stage.

The last world championships Siffan Hassan entered with a PR of 14:41 and earned the bronze medal

But she later went on to run several faster times soon after, including a 14:22 within a year. The point is no woman has ever won a world championship medal in the 5k in the last 15 years without eventually running a 14:35 or faster (signifying incredible endurance)

MatthewXCountry wrote:

ncrecuvuer wrote:

The last world championships Siffan Hassan entered with a PR of 14:41 and earned the bronze medal

But she later went on to run several faster times soon after, including a 14:22 within a year. The point is no woman has ever won a world championship medal in the 5k in the last 15 years without eventually running a 14:35 or faster (signifying incredible endurance)

Not exactly; Marta Domínguez is the silver medalist from 2003 Paris (close enough to 15 yrs) and has a pedestrian 14:48.33 PB. Priscah Jepleting Cherono is the bronze medalist from 2007 Osaka and has a 14:35.30 PB.

fisky wrote:

The reason the ban was only for the 400 to mile is that the IAAF had to find some sort of scientific data to back their position.

The number of women, even at the world elite level, with Caster's level of T is extremely small. When you have a very small number in a study, it can skew the outcome. It did in their study. High T was only found to help in the 400-mile so those were the only distances the IAAF had scientific proof to ban.

You, like most people posting here, are wrong about the intent and design of the study. The goal was explicitly not to show that DSD women have a performance advantage, the goal was to show that high T per se confers a performance adantage.

They used about 2000 T samples taken at the world championships 2011 and 2013 and grouped the athletes into tertiles.

Females in the highest T tertile performed significantly better than those in the lowest T tertile for 400, 400h, 800, hammer throw and pole vault. In all other disciplines they could not show that high T confers a performance advantage.

Yet we know that men are stronger than women and at elite level the difference in performance is at least 10% and sometimes 20%. The difference is largely testosterone, along with greater bone and muscle density and more red blood cells. Do we really need research to confirm what we already know?

Yes (because you don't know it, you just think you do).

this topic is so played out - Caster is woman, born with a vagina. She should be competing with other women regardless of the event. Sorry to all the women who have to compete against her but you got unlucky. Just like all the people who had to race against Bolt, Phelps, etc, etc.

If you are born with a vagina you should be allowed to compete versus women. End of story.

Thanks

AP: This just in........Caster's testes. They are in her vagina.

More as this develops (The story - not her testes, vagina, etc.)

Well..... wrote:

Yes (because you don't know it, you just think you do).

Maybe you should get out of the bedroom and go watch a school or college sports day some time. I guess following DL and major championships is out of the question. Look at the wr's for every event - track and field - and you may spot the difference. Males have 15-20 times the testosterone of females. Put elite against elite of both sexes and no female stands a chance.