Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mboma (18yrs) - 48.54 (withdrawn from 400 in Tokyo?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by mgallagh43 View Post
    but what gets a person noticed enough to be scrutinized is an aesthetic judgement - they look wrong and are running too fast to be normal.
    That's partially true. It could come up on a drug test first with someone off the radar. Any time a woman has an unusually high testosterone level, they work to figure out why.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by polevaultpower View Post

      That's partially true. It could come up on a drug test first with someone off the radar. Any time a woman has an unusually high testosterone level, they work to figure out why.
      I admit I'm not familiar with more recent innovations in doping control, but if they still use urinary T:E ratio then people endogenously producing a boatload of testosterone would come up normal-ish, since E (epitestosterone) is the biological precursor and would be produced in roughly equal amounts to T. I was thinking maybe the bio passport did blood testosterone screening but they use urine as well. Granted urinary T should be higher if blood T is high, but I'm not seasoned on how high blood T translates to urinary excretion either.

      I dont think it could be cleanly 1:1, because otherwise there's no point to BALCO's Cream, which took advantage of the use of T:E ratio as the doping standard by providing epitestosterone with the exogenous testosterone to fool the ratio screen. If the urinary testosterone level were clearly correlated to blood, taking the Cream (or just DHEA, tbh) would produce a high urinary test level, set off alarms, and you wouldn't need to check the ratio. The 5nmol cutoff for intersex women is a blood value, however.

      EDIT: Again admitting my lack of being up-to-date here, but previously mass spectroscopy was used on samples from athletes above the acceptable T:E ratio to determine if the testosterone was produced by the body or synthetically. As far as I know, blood levels are not being done standard. Mass spec doesn't provide an idea of level, just whether the molecules came from you or a lab. But again this is all old
      Last edited by mgallagh43; 07-06-2021, 03:40 AM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

        This wasn't just about Semenya. Remember the critical case that went to CAS was about Dutee Chand. And then the medal sweep in 2016 by 3 XY DSD athletes in the women's 800 helped seal the deal.
        But would Chand's case have been handled the same way if Semenya case had not existed?

        She is not that fast, and she is tiny. Would that have made any difference in IAAF's response to the initial ruling?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by mgallagh43 View Post
          ..but what gets a person noticed enough to be scrutinized is an aesthetic judgement - they look wrong and are running too fast to be normal. I agree that if Semenya, Wambui, Niyonsaba, or these two young women looked more "the part," there would be no questions.
          It would seem this is the first indicator for WA to do further investigations. Fast times + 'masculine' features = sweep in as they did with the Namibian women, and do whatever tests they think they need to do to prove their theory and prevent them from competing.

          I really struggle with my views on this. As human beings it is inbuilt in us to recognise the opposite sex. We 'know' what male and female looks like. On the whole we expect males to be more muscular, or bigger and even if we see a sports woman with muscles, we see difference in jawlines, in the softness of the face etc. Whatever it may be, we believe we can tell the difference. Because we expect to be able to, and because generally we can. For those human beings that are in the middle of the wide spectrum, who may have some sort of DSD, it challenges us, both visually/instinctively, and culturally/socially.

          I agree with PVP. The science doesn't and cannot currently prove what our eyes and the stop watch is telling us. Even if it could, is it right we stop these women from competing? I really don't know what to think.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Wiederganger View Post

            It would seem this is the first indicator for WA to do further investigations. Fast times + 'masculine' features = sweep in as they did with the Namibian women, and do whatever tests they think they need to do to prove their theory and prevent them from competing.
            No, that's not how it works. DNA profiling and measurement of testosterone level are routine parts of the drug testing protocol. Once an athlete becomes fast enough to be tested OOC, or they run in a meet where they get an in-competition test, and a lab sees 46Y and T-level above the designated range, that's when WA puts the processes in motion.

            Sudden fast times + masculine features are what make onlookers suspect an athlete is intersex, but those are not the criteria World Athletics uses to take action. They get the test results first; they don't see a face and physique and then decide to test.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Wiederganger View Post
              I agree with PVP. The science doesn't and cannot currently prove what our eyes and the stop watch is telling us. Even if it could, is it right we stop these women from competing? I really don't know what to think.
              Of course it is right that we stop them from competing against women.

              In any other realm outside of gender and sex, when an athlete wants to compete in a restricted competition or division, such as age group, weight, disability, citizenship, the burden of proof and argument is on the athlete to show they belong in the division when challenged, not on the sporting organization to argue or prove that they don't.

              You want to compete in the US Olympic trials? Show your proof of US citizenship; it's not on USATF to lawyer up prove you're not a US citizen or why you should be a US citizen to compete. You want to compete in an under-20 league? Show your birth certificate or other relevant documentation when asked; it's not on the sporting organization to prove you're not under 20 or argue for a justification to exclude athletes 20 and older.

              Ask not "should we exclude them from competing against women"; ask "why should we include individuals with XY chromosomes and high T in the female division? What makes them biologically female, or at least close enough to the female end of the spectrum?" Right now, those answers are largely based on "because it would hurt their feelings and anger the social justice warriors".

              Comment


              • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

                No, that's not how it works. DNA profiling and measurement of testosterone level are routine parts of the drug testing protocol. Once an athlete becomes fast enough to be tested OOC, or they run in a meet where they get an in-competition test, and a lab sees 46Y and T-level above the designated range, that's when WA puts the processes in motion.

                Sudden fast times + masculine features are what make onlookers suspect an athlete is intersex, but those are not the criteria World Athletics uses to take action. They get the test results first; they don't see a face and physique and then decide to test.
                In the instance of the Namibian women, I'm not sure I agree with what you say WA did, at least in Masilingi's instance. She has been competing at an elite level in 2020 - albeit only in Africa - as well as running in the African Games and making the final of the 400m back in 2019. So she would have been drug tested at some point in either 2019 or 2020 by some agency. If DNA profiling was standard, even just one drug test would have picked up the 46Y and T level as you say. However, it wasn't until they were in Europe this year, after Masilingi had run 49.88 in Chorzow and Mboma 48.54 in Bydgoszcz, that officers flew into their Italian training camp to 'do further tests'.

                I cannot believe Masilingi has been running at the African Games, at her National Champs, at an AGN league meeting in RSA, and not faced a single drug test until she came to Europe. Mboma, I can believe more, because her breakthrough is more sudden, but even then, last year she ran in her National Champs and also at an U20 meet in RSA (which she won in 51.81).

                So, if Masilingi has been drug tested in the last 2 years, they either aren't doing it properly or it isn't standard to test for 46Y.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

                  No, that's not how it works. DNA profiling and measurement of testosterone level are routine parts of the drug testing protocol. Once an athlete becomes fast enough to be tested OOC, or they run in a meet where they get an in-competition test, and a lab sees 46Y and T-level above the designated range, that's when WA puts the processes in motion.

                  Sudden fast times + masculine features are what make onlookers suspect an athlete is intersex, but those are not the criteria World Athletics uses to take action. They get the test results first; they don't see a face and physique and then decide to test.
                  I do stand corrected - plasma testosterone and free androgen, as well as several other sex hormones that can be elevated in these conditions, are tested as part of the bio passport: https://academic.oup.com/jcem/articl.../E1055/2536727 The paper discussing the full profiles is behind a paywall I can't get through though Interestingly these four athletes were referred for a variety of reasons - one for a high urinary test level and two for high plasma levels, the last came through her national federation without context in the paper.

                  I do not believe DNA testing is standard as part of the passport - in the above paper the athletes had a DNA karyotype run after they came to attention, and WA's discussion of DNA testing in the Bio Passport guidelines only suggests it as a potential testing option in conjunction with positive urinary steroid screenings. However I'm not convinced that biological passport detection is at play in every case, or even a majority of cases.

                  If you read the Namibian National Olympic Committee's press release on Mbomba and Masilingi getting pulled, they mention that WA requested additional screening while they were training in Rome (https://www.facebook.com/NamOlympic/...70075033009868). The language is a little vague, but given they explicitly mention that the screening was to meet DSD regulations, it sounds like this was outside standard bio passport enrollment. There is a separate statement out to African press today stating that both Mbomba and Masilingi were karyotyped, for whatever reason, a year ago and both are XX females, which should already exempt them from WA's regulations (https://allafrica.com/stories/202107060526.html).

                  I think Wiederganger's (and my) broader point is that regardless of how the athlete is screened, the science behind the regulation is at best tenuous and at worst grossly misrepresentative of the biological situation disputed here. Obviously the situations at play are individual and information kept private for good reason, but I have enough skepticism to doubt every athlete getting pulled for screenings is pulled because someone caught a high level of testosterone in a blood test.

                  And this is not to say anything about the philosophical groundings in which the testing regime makes its assumptions - there are good ethicists who take issue with the regulations while still accepting that higher testosterone is necessarily performance-enhancing in all cases. There are a variety of reasons to reject the ruling, not only the science - the color of the skin of the women it targets, the specific nations it targets in relation to the nations making the decisions at WA, the socioeconomic backgrounds of those it targets, the dog-whistle of "it's not fair to the other women" - it's not fair to the women who rise through the ranks only to get pulled because of a lab value they can't do anything about and that would have otherwise gone undetected, either.

                  Interestingly when IAAF/WA first started playing games, RSA took the temperature immediately on the historical context behind these practices while WA kept trying to say it was just going to follow the science. If COVID-19 has shown us anything, policy-makers don't follow science. They bend science to fit a narrative (for the record I love masking and vaccines and don't like quarter-assing a national quarantine because you can't craft coherent policy for a social safety net for the quarantine unemployed).
                  Last edited by mgallagh43; 07-06-2021, 11:34 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post
                    Ask not "should we exclude them from competing against women"; ask "why should we include individuals with XY chromosomes and high T in the female division? What makes them biologically female, or at least close enough to the female end of the spectrum?" Right now, those answers are largely based on "because it would hurt their feelings and anger the social justice warriors".
                    Is this us finally coming out and saying these women are not women? I have already explained how someone can have a Y chromosome and high testosterone and still be phenotypically female.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Wiederganger View Post

                      In the instance of the Namibian women, I'm not sure I agree with what you say WA did, at least in Masilingi's instance. She has been competing at an elite level in 2020 - albeit only in Africa - as well as running in the African Games and making the final of the 400m back in 2019. So she would have been drug tested at some point in either 2019 or 2020 by some agency. If DNA profiling was standard, even just one drug test would have picked up the 46Y and T level as you say. However, it wasn't until they were in Europe this year, after Masilingi had run 49.88 in Chorzow and Mboma 48.54 in Bydgoszcz, that officers flew into their Italian training camp to 'do further tests'.

                      I cannot believe Masilingi has been running at the African Games, at her National Champs, at an AGN league meeting in RSA, and not faced a single drug test until she came to Europe. Mboma, I can believe more, because her breakthrough is more sudden, but even then, last year she ran in her National Champs and also at an U20 meet in RSA (which she won in 51.81).

                      So, if Masilingi has been drug tested in the last 2 years, they either aren't doing it properly or it isn't standard to test for 46Y.
                      Not sure that is what happened! She could have been tested earlier and had high T then as you quoted went to Italy to do "further tests."

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by mgallagh43 View Post

                        Is this us finally coming out and saying these women are not women?
                        Are you saying they're women? What makes them women? I'm talking biologically, not socially or identity.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by mgallagh43 View Post

                          Is this us finally coming out and saying these women are not women?
                          Yes, I would think that a person with XY karyotype, High T, and some level of utilization of androgens is about as male as you can get. These are males that have had some problems is developing as males. Prepubescent males are still males just as males with ambiguous genitalia are males if they have XY and testes (internal).

                          I have already explained how someone can have a Y chromosome and high testosterone and still be phenotypically female.
                          Two points here: 1) If we don't want phenotype to be used to instigate an investigation we should not use it as the primary way (or at all) to disregard other biological indicators of maleness. 2) The XY karyotypes you are talking about are not under WAs concern as they don't have utilization of androgen and/or testes.

                          Just because they (the ones under WA's concern and guidelines) look more feminine and are not male elite athletes, for whatever biological mishaps/disadvantages, does not mean we should allow them to compete with woman where some of them would have an advantage. That fact that some don't is irrelevant. We don't allow men who are very feminine and are terrible athletically and frankly could not compete with some woman compete with woman just because they look more feminine or don't have an advantage with other males. As 18.99 said Semenya might as well have just been a D2 level man but given the opportunity to compete against woman, performed, relatively speaking, way better.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

                            Are you saying they're women? What makes them women? I'm talking biologically, not socially or identity.
                            I think their language is a cop-out, but even WA acknowledges these women are women even if the policies blatantly create a third class.

                            We are arguing on two different planets if you feel otherwise.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in View Post

                              Not sure that is what happened! She could have been tested earlier and had high T then as you quoted went to Italy to do "further tests."
                              I had a longer post about this that got caught in the spam filter, but the Namibian National Olympic Committee posted a media release on Facebook stating that WA requested a medical assessment while the athletes were in training camp in Italy, and the high testosterone value was drawn during that assessment and led to their removal from the Tokyo lists. NNOC were informed of the elevated values on June 30. Going to avoid linking articles just in case one of them is what tipped off the spam filter, but Googling "mbomba and masilingi" got me to several reports and the FB post.

                              Interestingly the NNOC's president has since come out in the media saying at least one of the two women were previously karyotyped a year ago and are XX female, which should technically exempt them from the testosterone regulation. He did not state the reason for the karyotyping, however. I was wrong about the bio passport not using blood testosterone values - it does. It does not appear, though, that DNA profiling is standard, and it would make no clinical sense to do standard DNA profiling. Doing a battery of genetic tests on every athlete for DSD would be extraordinarily expensive, and there's no reason to karyotype people at baseline because it doesn't provide a ton of granular information beyond if there are major changes to chromosomes or extra/missing chromosomes. WA "suggests" some kind of DNA testing only if an athlete has an abnormal steroid profile in their guidelines.

                              I think we need to accept that subjective determinations are a not insignificant part of how athletes are chosen for WA's screening, especially if they're like Mbomba and Masilingi and suddenly have a breakout year before they can get into the bio passport system. How that comes up in your assessment of the ethics of the whole enterprise is y'all's call.
                              Last edited by mgallagh43; 07-06-2021, 01:35 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by mgallagh43 View Post

                                I had a longer post about this that got caught in the spam filter, but the Namibian National Olympic Committee posted a media release on Facebook stating that WA requested a medical assessment while the athletes were in training camp in Italy, and the high testosterone value was drawn during that assessment and led to their removal from the Tokyo lists. NNOC were informed of the elevated values on June 30. Going to avoid linking articles just in case one of them is what tipped off the spam filter, but Googling "mbomba and masilingi" got me to several reports and the FB post.

                                Interestingly the NNOC's president has since come out in the media saying at least one of the two women were previously karyotyped a year ago and are XX female, which should technically exempt them from the testosterone regulation. He did not state the reason for the karyotyping, however. I was wrong about the bio passport not using blood testosterone values - it does. It does not appear, though, that DNA profiling is standard. WA "suggests" it if an athlete has an abnormal steroid profile in their guidelines.

                                I think we need to accept that subjective determinations are a not insignificant part of how athletes are chosen for WA's screening, especially if they're like Mbomba and Masilingi and suddenly have a breakout year before they can get into the bio passport system. How that comes up in your assessment of the ethics of the whole enterprise is y'all's call.
                                Ah I see, that's good news for her being XX. I don't think WA should be doing any testing based off of looks either. We can't assume that they are DSD let alone what type of DSD beforehand. They should be subject to regular testing like everyone else and if their T is high do further investigation. But as noted it would have been good to have her biological passport already in place with karytype already known by WA. Was her T endogenous? And what level (obviously above 5) was it if we know?

                                This brings up another sticky problem - on social media there is a lot of talk about racism because many are suggesting that African woman have higher natural T than other 'races'.

                                I'm would be interested in studies on large population groups based on race or geography of natural T levels for woman. I have no doubt that like all things biological there are some natural extremes and she may be one of them - more power to her if so. Any guidance on this issue.
                                Last edited by proofs in the pudd'in; 07-06-2021, 01:43 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X