RSS Feed
July 21st, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda
Testosterone and prosthetics: the latest attempts to draw the line between legality and cheating in athletics offend both science and natural justice
EVERY time the summer Olympics comes around, so does the debate over where to draw the line between legal performance enhancement and cheating. This year it is especially relevant because of the presence at the London Olympics of two South African runners, Oscar Pistorius and Caster Semenya.
Pistorius is a double amputee who runs on prosthetic blades. A 2008 ruling found that they do not give him an unfair advantage and he has been cleared to run.
Semenya is an 800-metre runner whose victory at the 2009 world championships led to the reintroduction of a form of gender testing into athletics. Women with naturally high levels of male hormones can now be barred from competing (see “Rip up new Olympic sex test rules”).
The International Olympic Committee has thus arrived at the absurd position where carbon-fibre prosthetics are acceptable but naturally high levels of testosterone in women are not.
Drawing the line is difficult and subjective. Decisions should be based on sound science but also appeal to natural justice. By these criteria the Pistorius decision is defensible, but the hormone one is far from being so.
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
Have your say
Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.
Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article
Unfair Advantages
Thu Jul 19 09:27:03 BST 2012 by Eric Kvaalen
“Women with naturally high levels of male hormones can now be barred from competing.”
If a person has the build of a man, due to high levels of male hormones, why shouldn’t that person be banned from competing in the women’s division? We can’t just use what people say about their sex to decide which division they should be in.
If there is no good criterion, then we’ll have to abandon the idea of having separate competitions for men and for women.
The case of Pistorius is really problematic. How can one know whether his prostheses help him or not? They apparently do help him in the straight stretches. He’s a great sportsman, but the fact that one of the great runners of the world has prostheses, whereas they are quite rare in the general public, is a sign that they probably do give him an advantage.
Of course, if he were to be banned from the Olympics for having an advantage, then he shouldn’t be allowed to compete in the Paralympics either, which are for those who are disadvantaged!
Unfair Advantages
Thu Jul 19 13:31:32 BST 2012 by Kris
A person’s sex is not just their hormone levels, and high levels of testosterone do not give a woman “the build of a man”. There are lots of complex interactions (e.g. with oestrogen) that are a very different – look up PCOS. Barring a woman from competing based on hormone levels is very problematic. And what about intersex people? Gender is not the binary people assume.
Gender testing is at least as problematic as assessing advantage from prosthetics. As the article says, the IOC has arrived at an absurd position!
Unfair Advantages
Thu Jul 19 17:35:28 BST 2012 by TwoZeroOZ
I think divisions by gender is a poor choice.
The division is meant to give everyone a fair chance, to pit people against those in the same tier. If a woman(whether or not they’ve undergone sexual reassignment), has the physical capabilities of a typical man in the Olympics, then they should all be competing together.
Unfair Advantages
Thu Jul 19 19:57:27 BST 2012 by Eric Kvaalen
As I understand it, Caster Semenya is intersex. (I hope this comment doesn’t get deleted for possible libel — it’s not a crime! Nor am I expressing prejudice — it’s simply what I have gathered from news reports).
What I’m arguing is that intersex people should not be put in the female category. The female category is supposed to be protected from those who have the advantage of being male, so putting someone in the female category who is “half male” is not fair.
I know it’s problematic. Where do you draw the line between female and intersex? But we have to have some criterion or else abandon the separation of the sexes.
All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the “Report” link in that comment to report it to us.
If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
