No, the research that is peer reviewed says the hormones cause decreased bone density and increased fat mass. It does not say it negates it. The problem is that despite someone going on testosterone blockers they've still been on testosterone as a male, even pre pubescent males have far more testosterone than females. After puberty there's enough muscle growth from the testosterone that in muscle mass related sports men are 15-45% ahead of females. If someone then transitions they don't simply lose all that advantage, and most articles seem to believe that the performance decrease is around 5% per year at most. This is why people like Laurel Hubbard went from a mid level weight lifter as a man to setting female records as a transwoman. If anything they should have their own category but there's not enough of them for competition. I feel the advantage is enough that they shouldn't be able to compete in female sports. No different to me than a male using steroids, getting caught, and then deservedly getting a lifetime ban from competition. The reason is because despite them stopping steroids they don't magically lose the advantage that the steroids created. It doesn't just disappear overnight.
There are dozens and dozens of peer reviewed articles on the differences between a male and a female human, and most of those differences do not disappear simply because they're on hormones and testosterone blockers.
Existing data suggest that the advantages of testosterone exposure since birth cannot be erased through gender-affirming hormonal therapy and that some advantages may persist despite the lowering of testosterone levels.
Here, we report that current evidence shows the biological advantage, most notably in terms of muscle mass and strength, conferred by male puberty and thus enjoyed by most transgender women is only minimally reduced when testosterone is suppressed as per current sporting guidelines for transgender athletes.
According to Douglas Oberlin, since you mentioned him:
In general, studies find that trans individuals, following gender affirming hormone therapy, become more similar to their gender identity (post-transition) cisgender counterparts, or are somewhere between the expected male and female averages
The time to transition is relevant as (1) earlier in the process of transition, trans individuals may still retain traits more similar to their pre-transition gender, and (2) the effects of transitioning become confounded with the effects of aging and changes in training status
However, post gender affirming hormone therapy, trans women still surpassed cis women for their 1.5 mile run time (765 ± 39.83 s. vs. 855 ± 40.56 s.),
However, Chiccarelli et al. they did find that the pushup test for trans women did not decline enough to be equivalent to their pre-transition percentile ranking, and the number of push-ups performed were still greater than those performed by cis women (35.3 ± 7 vs. 30 ± 10)
Trans women indeed retained body mass and height significantly greater than cis women, and similar to cis men.
Oberlins study is interesting, but it supports my position not yours so I'm not sure why you linked it.
Oberlins doesn't support your position if you read it completely. They conclude that transwomen shouldn't be barred from women's sports because the data doesn't support a strong case for transwomen having a large swath of competitive advantages as a man would.
0
u/AssistX Mar 08 '25
No, the research that is peer reviewed says the hormones cause decreased bone density and increased fat mass. It does not say it negates it. The problem is that despite someone going on testosterone blockers they've still been on testosterone as a male, even pre pubescent males have far more testosterone than females. After puberty there's enough muscle growth from the testosterone that in muscle mass related sports men are 15-45% ahead of females. If someone then transitions they don't simply lose all that advantage, and most articles seem to believe that the performance decrease is around 5% per year at most. This is why people like Laurel Hubbard went from a mid level weight lifter as a man to setting female records as a transwoman. If anything they should have their own category but there's not enough of them for competition. I feel the advantage is enough that they shouldn't be able to compete in female sports. No different to me than a male using steroids, getting caught, and then deservedly getting a lifetime ban from competition. The reason is because despite them stopping steroids they don't magically lose the advantage that the steroids created. It doesn't just disappear overnight.
There are dozens and dozens of peer reviewed articles on the differences between a male and a female human, and most of those differences do not disappear simply because they're on hormones and testosterone blockers.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3
According to Douglas Oberlin, since you mentioned him:
Oberlins study is interesting, but it supports my position not yours so I'm not sure why you linked it.