Stu,
As always I have really enjoyed your contributions to this thread. I would like to add something that hasn't been touched on I don't think, but I do think it rests at the heart of this issue.
Maybe someone in the academic field will have an easier time confirming this information (I am looking at you Doctor Dave). I believe adult men have somewhere between 12 and 17 times the amount of testosterone in their body when compared to adult women. As boys age they experience periods of large doses or exposure to large amounts of testosterone. I think there is a period between 3 and 6, and then again when boys are adolescents. If we were talk about the relative difference of any substance at 12 to 17 times, I think most people would accept that this is a significant difference. In addition to this, what is the effect of this difference OVER TIME?
For me, it seems reasonable to think an increased exposure to testosterone over time is different than the supplementing of testosterone or estrogen when a person decides they are trans or whatever the right term is. Sure a trans woman or man begins to receive the biological benefits and costs of their changed hormones, but it starts when they start changing their gender.
A lifetime of alcohol abuse ruins a liver. A night of alcohol abuse cause a headache. I realize hormones are not alcohol, but I find it hard to believe there are no effects of testosterone or estrogen that are a function of time. Additionally, in talking about the differences of men and women players who are not trans, I don't think it's an unreasonable argument to suggest that testosterone does not only influence strength. It helps to regulate emotion, increase aggression, and tolerate risk taking. All of this, it would seem to me, would influence decision making.
I find it frustrating that much of the modern discussion related to men and women does not really (in my view) talk about the relative difference of testosterone. I think some people. like to pretend that this is not significant, when it clearly is. Suppose I suggested to everyone that there was no difference in their coffee or its effect on their body, now or over time, if we increased the sweetener in their coffee by 12 times. Everyone would be aghast at the horror and amused at the ridiculousness of my suggestion.
kollegedave
Dr Dave has a doctorate in mechanical engineering.
Medical academic here. Physician and physician educator.
There is a wide range of normal testosterone levels in both men and women, and these levels fluctuate naturally throughout the day and throughout life.
The simple physiologic correlations that people have been attempting to make in popular discussions in the media and social networking are mostly wrong due to over-simplification and/or misinformation.
As for the second statement I bolded, I think it has been very much a part of the conversation. Perhaps you have somehow missed it. Many have commented about it.
For example, talking about supplementing, consider "Low T". It is not a disease. There is no standard of care for treating it, nor adequate evidence base to define it. In my professional opinion it is most often a "back door" to steroid abuse. I personally know one athlete that was killed by it in combination with herbal therapy and "nutraceuticals", at the hands of a personal trainer and "functional medicine" specialist.
There is a great deal of "bro science" afoot, that's why I mostly avoid this discussion. People mostly are not genuinely interested in paying attention and understanding the matters.
The differences in growth and development between the male and female are in great part, but not completely, due to the hormone differences. The completion of that growth and development is at about age 27 or 28 when the brain ceases the maturation process. That's why we encourage people to get most of their advanced education before that age. That education is more about training brain development than learning "things" as it is popularly misunderstood. That's why most of the wealthy in the world are in fact "educated" people.
After full maturational development, altering the hormones can and does alter physical and behavioral characteristics within limits. Additional surgery can achieve an aesthetic change to more closely approximate a change in gender. This approximation can be so extensive that contrary to "bro science" you could be hard pressed to tell, even if intimate with that person. In fact, it can be challenging for a physician to tell in a superficial or cursory examination.
What can that mean as far as athletic performance? That can be understood by crunching the numbers as Dr Dave did in his article. I recommend reading it. It cannot explain the biology, and does not really attempt to. That would be a much more complex discussion.
tv.kozoom.com
