Vorpal wrote:Did you actually read the article? Many of the women discussed as having hyperandrogenism were born biological women. Dutee Chand won a law suit and the right to compete in olympics on that basis.
That phrase 'biological women' is not self-defining.
Here's the findings from the Dutee Chand case:https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_ ... ATION_.pdf
" Dr van Anders pointed out that women with DSDs can be considered within the normal, healthy range and do not necessarily connote disorders that require clinical attention. The discussion then turned to the causes of high endogenous levels of testosterone, such as functioning testes, a tumour, or adrenal disorders. "
In other words a person who has an intersex condition such as complete androgen insensitivity (possesses testicles but does not respond to testosterone so will develop breasts and apparently female genitals, but has no fertility) is considered to be in the normal healthy female range, on the basis that they are not unhealthy.
As you can see here:https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/androgen- ... -syndrome/
"The penis doesn't form or is underdeveloped, which means the child's genitals may appear female, or between male and female. However, they don't have a womb or ovaries and have fully or partially undescended testicles."
Alsohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_ ... y_syndrome
"insensitivity to androgens is clinically significant only when it occurs in genetic males (i.e. individuals with a Y-chromosome, or more specifically, an SRY gene). Clinical phenotypes in these individuals range from a normal male habitus with mild spermatogenic defect or reduced secondary terminal hair, to a full female habitus, despite the presence of a Y-chromosome."
In other words a person with AIS has XY chromosomes and testicles.
It continues in the Chand case above
"There is a class of female athletes who, by reason of DSDs, have high levels of endogenous testosterone. These athletes are female but have a medical or genetic condition that is believed to give them an athletic advantage. "
This requires unpicking - 'a class of female atheletes' - what does female mean here? And then it continues: 'by reason of DSDs'. A DSD is a disorder of sexual development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorders ... evelopment
this refers to "congenital conditions in which development of chromosomal, gonadal, or anatomical sex is atypical."
In other words they are talking about people who are legally female but who possess atypical anatomy or genetics. Dutee Chand does NOT have normal female biology, but rather a DSD.
If you read the ruling in full you can see that in fact there is no attempt to test whether or not Dutee Chand fits into a definition of female or not.
'The IAAF points to the fact that the Hyperandrogenism Regulations expressly and emphatically disavow the concept of “sex testing” and “gender verification”. According to the IAAF, the Hyperandrogenism Regulations expressly acknowledge the femaleness of the Athlete, not the reverse. '
"Once an athlete is legally recognised as female, the Panel considers that an athlete must be permitted to compete in the female category unless her naturally high androgen levels confer a significant performance advantage over other female competitors"
In other words, there was very specifically NO
ruling on whether or not Dutee Chand is a biological female.
Instead the hyperandrogenism regulations as then implemented were an attempt to avoid ever having to rule on this, and simply divided people by testosterone levels.
It has been suggested that Chand has androgen insensitivity syndrome (and hence would not , though as per the above it was not even considered in the ruling (though it was mentioned that Indian doctors performed ultrasound, presumably to look for testicles). https://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.c ... hand-case/
It is further mentioned in the Chand ruling that the question of 'androgen insensitivity' is a difficult one:
it is “easy” to determine complete insensitivity since the athlete will present no signs of virilisation at all. However, it is more difficult to determine partial androgen insensitivity. There is no specific test that can enable a precise quantification of the degree of partial insensitivity and exact grading is therefore “very difficult”.
Virilisation, assessed by an expert panel, is necessary to ascertain total or partial androgen insensitivity. There are difficulties in ascertaining a specific percentage or degrees of androgen resistance and Dr Bermon says that the benefit of the doubt is given to the athlete.
Dr Bermon, who has served as a member of the IAAF Medical and Anti-Doping Commission since 2006, has only seen one case where a female athlete was completely androgen insensitive.
In other words, while androgen insensitivity is common among athletes competing as female, it's mostly incomplete, and the 'assessment' seems to consist of looking at the athlete and assessing to what degree they look like a man, which in reality seems to result in the benefit of the doubt going to the athlete.
(and moreover in any case having XY chromosomes with complete AIS is still advantageous in comparison to XX females, as XY have bigger stature etc.)
If you want it made more clear, although the average
testosterone produced by men and women is very different, as is the range, there is considerable overlap in the distribution for a population, if it is large.
The image is from a 2009 study, whereas the link is to a 2017 study.
Furthermore, it is not particularly useful in that it is not considering elite athletes (though you can see that the male mean is six standard deviations above the female at 18-24, and seven standard deviations above at 25-34, which is extremely far away). And, as noted in the Chand ruling above, the existence of males with very low levels of testosterone (which can be a response to the discontinuation of anabolic steroids, or a medical condition) is not the point, but rather we are looking at females with very high levels: " the probability of a healthy woman reaching 10 nmol/L is practically zero."
Here are the male and female ranges:
(see https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/S ... 413aa80a1f
In other words the middle 50% of female athletes possess free testosterone roughly between 6 and 12 pmol/l, while the male range is 250-480 pmol/l.
For the individual female athletes
The very highest free testosterone reading was no higher than 50 pmol/l in most events.
However in the 800m, where Caster Semenya competes, this was 469.3 pmol/l.
This is a high male range of testosterone.