The new policy on hyperandrogenism in elite female athletes is not about "sex testing"

How is the Topic of Intersex Athletes in Elite Sports Positioned in Academic Literature Between January 2000 and July 2022? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Within the topic of intersex athletes in elite sports, science has become a decisive factor in decision- and policy-making. However, in the academic literature approaches to this topic vary. An overview of these approaches is proposed to provide better insight into relevant aspects and underlying values and may serve as a starting point on the path toward a solid solution of the question of categorization of intersex athletes in elite sporting competition.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to discover how the topic of intersex elite athletes is positioned in the academic literature from January 2000 to July 2022 from a neutral perspective.

METHODS

A comprehensive search in eleven databases using the search terms [intersex* and sport*] yielded 87 articles. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to find all authors' statements including perspectives on intersex athletes and proposals for solutions. Underlying values were extracted and connected to each other during axial coding.

RESULTS

The results provide an overview of the sometimes-contradictory perspectives toward intersex elite athletes and proposals for solutions. Three core values were distilled: social justice for intersex elite athletes, competition fairness, and evidence-based practice. The authors' statements disclose an interaction/conflict between social justice and competition fairness.

CONCLUSIONS

The results raise an important discussion on the role of science within the topic of intersex elite athletes. A multidisciplinary approach including scientists and other experts is suggested to find an appropriate solution. Additionally, more awareness on intersex variations is needed for a better overall understanding and to ensure a respectful approach for everyone involved.

Integrating Transwomen and Female Athletes with Differences of Sex Development (DSD) into Elite Competition: The FIMS 2021 Consensus Statement

Sport is historically designated by the binary categorization of male and female that conflicts with modern society. Sport’s governing bodies should consider reviewing rules determining the eligibility of athletes in the female category as there may be lasting advantages of previously high testosterone concentrations for transwomen athletes and currently high testosterone concentrations in differences in sex development (DSD) athletes. The use of serum testosterone concentrations to regulate the inclusion of such athletes into the elite female category is currently the objective biomarker that is supported by most available scientific literature, but it has limitations due to the lack of sports performance data before, during or after testosterone suppression. Innovative research studies are needed to identify other biomarkers of testosterone sensitivity/responsiveness, including molecular tools to determine the functional status of androgen receptors. The scientific community also needs to conduct longitudinal studies with specific control groups to generate the biological and sports performance data for individual sports to inform the fair inclusion or exclusion of these athletes. Eligibility of each athlete to a sport-specific policy needs to be based on peer-reviewed scientific evidence made available to policymakers from all scientific communities. However, even the most evidence-based regulations are unlikely to eliminate all differences in performance between cisgender women with and without DSD and transwomen athletes. Any remaining advantage held by transwomen or DSD women could be considered as part of the athlete’s unique makeup.

The Biology of Sex and Sport

Sex and gender are not the same. Sex is defined by the human genotype and pertains to biologic differences between males and females. Gender is a fluid concept molded by self-perception, social constructs, and culturally laden attitudes and expectations of men and women. In general, males have longer limb levers, stronger bones, greater muscle mass and strength, and greater aerobic capacity. Females exhibit less muscle fatigability and faster recovery during endurance exercise. Physiologic sex-based differences have led to an average performance gap of 10% that has remained stable since the 1980s. The performance disparity is lowest for swimming and highest for track and field events. The International Olympic Committee currently mandates that female athletes with differences of sex development, or intersex traits, and transgender female athletes must limit their blood testosterone to <10 nmol/L for 12 months to be eligible for competition in the female classification.

Do anabolic-androgenic steroids have performance-enhancing effects in female athletes?

Doping with anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS) is common among both male and female athletes and is a growing public health problem. Review of historical data of systematic state-sponsored doping programs implemented by the German Democratic Republic in elite female athletes and from clinical trials of testosterone administration in non-athlete women suggests that AAS have ergogenic effects in women. The use of AAS in female athletes has been associated with adverse effects that include acne, hirsutism, deepening of the voice and menstrual disturbances; life-threatening adverse effects such as cardiac arrhythmias and sudden death have also been reported. Therefore, detection of AAS abuse in female athletes is important to ensure fairness in competition; at the same time, the athletes should be educated regarding the adverse consequences of AAS use. Although administration of exogenous androgens have been associated with ergogenic effects, it remains unclear whether endogenous hyperandrogenism seen in some medical conditions such as disorders of sexual development (DSD), congenital adrenal hyperplasia and polycystic ovary syndrome, confers any competitive advantage. Well-designed studies are needed to determine the effects of endogenous hyperandrogenism on athletic performance in female athletes.

Biological Sex, Gender, and Public Policy

Policy debates have focused on who can participate in or access single-sex activities or services. This article describes how science of the biology of sex is relevant to three major policy areas: parenting (including leaves), sports, and public spaces. We focus on what scientists know about sex and gender (and gender/sex, where gender and sex are intertwined), and the role of various biological factors, including hormones such as testosterone and estradiol as well as genetics, gonads, genitals, and more. The policies under debate often use “biological sex,” but this fails to account for scientific understandings of sex and gender, misrepresents sex as single-faceted and binary, and overlooks scientific consensus about the importance of gender and identity.

Hurdling over sex? Sport, science, and equity

Between 1968 and 1999, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) required all female athletes to undergo genetic testing as part of its sex verification policy, under the assumption that it needed to prevent men from impersonating women and competing in female-only events. After critics convinced officials that genetic testing was scientifically and ethically flawed for this purpose, the IOC replaced the policy in 1999 with a system allowing for medical evaluations of an athlete's sex only in cases of "reasonable suspicion," but this system also created injustice for athletes and stoked international controversies. In 2011, the IOC adopted a new policy on female hyperandrogenism, which established an upper hormonal limit for athletes eligible to compete in women's sporting events. This new policy, however, still leaves important medical and ethical issues unaddressed. We review the history of sex verification policies and make specific recommendations on ways to improve justice for athletes within the bounds of the current hyperandrogenism policy, including suggestions to clarify the purpose of the policy, to ensure privacy and confidentiality, to gain informed consent, to promote psychological health, and to deploy equitable administration and eligibility standards for male and female athletes.