| Zu einer der Studien |  |
>Was imo richtig ist, nur scheint daraus keiner zu lernen (zu wollen).
>
>[https://www.dw.com/de/faktencheck-sind-transgender-athleten-bei-olympia-im-vorteil/a-58675555]
>
>Ach ja, ich glaube FS hat South Park falsch verstanden
>
Ich hab mir mal die Mühe gemacht und zumindest eine der im obigen Text verlinkten Studien zu lesen.
[https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/15/865]
Nur mal zur Zusammenfassung (BTW, die Qualität der angeführten Studien sind nur "moderate":
Conclusion In transwomen, hormone therapy rapidly reduces Hgb to levels seen in cisgender women. In contrast, hormone therapy decreases strength, LBM and muscle area, yet values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy.
Männer haben in der Norm einen Hb-Wert von 14-18, Frauen einen von 12-16. Wie man sieht gibt es bereits hier Überschneidungen. Überspitzt: Ein Wert kann durchaus fallen (18 -> 17) und den neuen Wert kann auch durchaus bei Frauen vorfinden. Nebenbei angemerkt ist der Unterschied gerade im Ausdauersport am geringsten.
Strength loss with 12 months of GAHT also ranged from non-significant to 7%. Taking these strength parameter data collectively, and in consideration of cisgender women demonstrating 31% lower LBM,59 36%60 lower hand-grip strength and 35%61 lower knee extension strength than cisgender men, the small decrease in strength in transwomen after 12–36 months of GAHT suggests that transwomen likely retain a strength advantage over cisgender women.
Hingegen ist der Leistungsunterschied im Kraftbereich kaum verneinbar.
Überspitzt: Trans Macho (Wo)man hat wohl doch einen Vorteil.
However, several limitations are noted. Although the data we present are meaningful, the effects of GAHT on these parameters, or indeed athletic performance in transgender people who engage in training and competition, remain unknown. The levels of physical activity of the transwomen compared with cisgender women in the studies were not reported. Other limitations include the studies being written in English only, and the research being conducted in Western countries, contributing to geographical bias. Furthermore, as with much research with transgender individuals, there is a sparse data risk66 because of small sample sizes and short study durations, indicative of the relatively small population, difficulties with recruitment and high drop-out rates over time. Indeed, the overlap of participants in the ENIGI studies and the heterogenous methodology in the other studies precluded the possibility of meaningful meta-analysis. However, overall, the results across different study groups and methods (ie, longitudinal vs follow-up studies) are largely consistent, suggesting that the risk of selective reporting and publication bias are low and the data in the reviewed studies are reliable. This review only focused on binary transgender individuals; those who medically transition from their birth assigned gender to the opposite gender and did not consider non-binary individuals. Not only are there even more limited data on non-binary individuals, but also, for many, their affirmed gender expression does not require GAHT, thus there are no hormone-induced changes to observe which would be relevant to this review. That is not to say that non-binary inclusivity in sport is not an important issue, only that the central tenets are not focused on physiology.
Begrüßenswert wären Untersuchungen vor allem im Kampfsport, hier würde noch viel mehr Faktoren reinspielen wie Knochendichte und Körperfett. Vor allem letzteres beim Einwiegen wäre wirklich ein extrem entscheidender Vorteil.