A new study funded by the International Olympic Committee revealed that “trans women are not biological men,” which supports the idea of athletic differences between men, women, and transgender women, according to the newspaper “The New York Times“American.
The study found that trans athletes showed greater handgrip strength – an indicator of overall muscular strength – but lower jumping abilities, lung function and relative cardiovascular fitness, compared to women assigned female at birth.
These data, which also compared trans women to men, contradicted a broad claim often made by supporters of rules that prevent trans women from competing in women’s sports.
It also prompted the study’s authors to warn against a “rush to expand such policies,” which already bar transgender athletes from participating in a few Olympic sports.
“I am honest.” Transgender swimmer Thomas takes legal action against the “ban”
American swimmer Leah Thomas, who was the first transgender athlete to win an NCAA title, is taking legal action in an attempt to compete again in elite women’s sports, including the Olympics.
The authors, who included a member of the International Olympic Committee’s medical and scientific committee, said their findings showed that sports federations “should be wary of banning trans women from the female category without further research into their individual sports.”
The International Olympic Committee left eligibility rules for trans athletes to the global federations that govern individual sports.
While the Olympic Committee provided funding for the study, Olympic officials had no influence on the results, said Professor of Sport and Exercise Science Yiannis Pitsiladis, one of the study’s authors.
Out Sports, a website that reports on LGBT issues, praised the study as a “point of evidence” that concluded that “a comprehensive ban on sports is a mistake.”
But some scientists and mathematicians described the study as “deeply flawed” in a report published by the newspaper “telegraph“British, and that it represents a “new low in the bar” for the International Olympic Committee.
They claimed that the study “compared athletically ineligible trans women with cisgender athletic competitors, in order to prove a point.”
Threats
In the new study, recently published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, 19 cisgender men (those whose gender identity matches the sex they were assigned at birth) and 12 trans men were tested, along with 23 trans women and 21 cisgender women.
All participants played competitive sports or underwent physical training at least 3 times a week. The researchers said that all the trans athletes underwent at least a year of treatment to lower testosterone levels and took estrogen supplements.
The study acknowledged some limitations, including the small sample size and the fact that some were not followed long-term as they transitioned. None of the participants were athletes competing at the national or international level.
Transsexual women outside athletics tournaments… “Transphobia” or a temporary necessity?
The International Association of Athletics Federations’ decision to ban transsexual women from competing in elite female championships if they have gone through the male stages of puberty sparked rejection among the LGBT+ community, who considered it unfair and indicative of a masculine outlook.
The issue of including trans women in sports competitions goes beyond the sporting framework, since the American trans swimmer, Leah Thomas, won the 500-meter freestyle race at the United States level in 2022.
Her victory then sparked controversy in the United States, where the issue witnessed a sharp disagreement between conservatives and progressives, before the controversy crossed the Atlantic Ocean.
Swimmers like Thomas “retain significant physical advantages, in endurance, strength, speed, power and lung volume, even after reducing their testosterone levels through medication,” FINA said in a previous document.
The debate over the issue became so heated that Pitsiladis said he and his research team “received threats.” He warned that this might push other scientists away from pursuing research on this topic.
He added: “Why would any scientist do this if he would be subjected to severe criticism and character assassination?” adding: “This is no longer a scientific issue. Unfortunately, it has become a political issue.”
