Comments on The Science of Sport: Semenya's performance advantage: An irrelevant que...

Good blog,gives knowledge

2010-03-03T11:16:08.614+02:00

Good blog,gives knowledge

Nice post

2010-03-01T12:42:01.679+02:00

Nice post

Good post

2010-02-27T11:23:56.334+02:00

Good post

And this was a very nice piece of opinion writing ...

2009-09-22T10:27:51.483+02:00

And this was a very nice piece of opinion writing on what do about Chuene:

"South African High Commissioner in Kabul? The country's first cosmonaut (on a one-way trip)? Internal maintenance assistant at the shark tank at the aquarium in Cape Town? There are assorted possibilities, all of which have great appeal: whatever we do settle on, the one thing we certainly don't need is Leonard Chuene staying on as the head of Athletics South Africa, an institution he has dragged into the gutter with breathtaking success.

The sports administrator, by and large, is an unlovable beast, and a simple tenet holds true in most cases: anyone who wants to be a sports administrator generally, by definition, shouldn't be one. South African sport tends to succeed despite, rather than because of the administrators running assorted codes, and we've had some nightmare characters involved in the past (see South African rugby’s past decade for a slew of appropriate examples). But even by the consistently low standards of local sport, Chuene has proved particularly insidious.
"

Tina wrote: So my question to you is this- are you...

2009-09-22T02:39:18.719+02:00

Tina wrote:
So my question to you is this- are you willing to admit that your assessment of what are by your own admission unsubstantiated allegations of Semenya being IS (or else you wouldn't have demanded that *I* substantiate them, would you?) might in fact be incorrect?
===========
There are some important allegations which are not unsubstantiated, they've been proven already.

Nevertheless, my assessement may be wrong. Or maybe it's partially wrong, or correct. It will remain to be seen.

However, until more information is revealed, I continue to suspect foul play.

Zoe: And if you think Ms Semenya hasn't been accus...

2009-09-22T02:25:13.437+02:00

Zoe:
And if you think Ms Semenya hasn't been accused of cheating, I suggest you look at what's been said by some of those she beat - before being silenced by their own athletic bodies. Or what's been said throughout the world in newspapers, TV reports, radio shows.... not forgetting comments on this very site. To say that she hasn't been formally accused of cheating would be equally disingenuous: even those who fail doping tests are not - they are merely disqualified without comment.
======
And you know why? Because we live in the world of Marion Jones, Nelson Piquet Jnr, the cycling guys, the football cheats, and not least of all, Madoff.

People cheat and scam all the time, specially when there is glory and monetary rewards involved. Is that news to you? When there are suspect circumstances, we suspect.

Just remember that Marion Jones passed every single doping test in her career before she went to prison. Would you have maligned all those people who suspected her of doping before her scandal broke?

And it's only the real stupid ones that didn't suspect Madoff's little scheme wasn't clean. Anyone who did their due diligence had their red flags raised with no concrete proof of anything.

I really don't see why you have all this wailing going on here, if there are plenty of reasons to suspect something is amiss with Semenya's case.

Tina wrote: As for your double standard where you...

2009-09-22T01:56:45.265+02:00

Tina wrote:

As for your double standard where you claim that (in your own words) "allegations" "based on leaked emails" (that you have not produced and until then are 100% hearsay)
============

And why should *I* need to produce any emails, if the papers have already done so?

Wouldn't it be nice if you could read the news before posting here?

Would you like an example?

http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-09-18-semenya-saga-chuenes-trail-of-lies

or:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/lying-for-semenya-athletics-boss-clambers-for-moral-high-ground-20090921-fx0k.html

Is it hearsay, or simply that you are really incompetent at following what the media is reporting?

Maybe you could apply to be Chuene's personal PR manager, what do you think?

Tina wrote: As for the rest of your post, Zoe has...

2009-09-22T01:23:18.661+02:00

Tina wrote:

As for the rest of your post, Zoe has pretty well answered your question as to why any alleged tests were not made public or presented to the IAAF when she said-

"That's what happens to Intersexed people. The rules get ignored. They get labelled as cheats and disqualified whenever their condition is publicised".
========

As it has been reported in the media, some intersex athletes are allowed to compete and their identity has not been made public, and no one has labeled them cheats.

The Semenya case was made public because the South AFricans are being suspected of cheating or fraud or not complying with the rules, based on many factors. I doubt that all these same factors were present in these other Intersex cases and that's why they never became public in the first place.

I found Kessler's assertion discrediting the media leaks so far intriguing, but one has to look at the media leaks strategy from the IAAF's position. It doesn't make sense to leak false test results to the media, if the SA tests could easily disprove that.

That would certainly discredit the IAAF of all credibility. So, if they are going to leak, they need to leak the truth. Unless, of course, they are as bright as Chuene, then anything is possible.

On the other hand, the IAAF accepted her in the race, even though they counseled the ASA not to enroll Semenya.

However, this could be explained by the fact that maybe they were up against the wall.

If they needed to do tests which take longer than the time they had available, it meant they had no choice but to allow her in, even though she might be found ineligible later on.

From their actions, I think that they try to avoid being caught in this situation, but here we have the South Africans complicating things this time around.

"Indian 800m runner Santhi Soundarajan was strippe...

2009-09-22T00:56:04.298+02:00

"Indian 800m runner Santhi Soundarajan was stripped of her silver medal at the 2006 Asian Games after failing a gender test. She was later diagnosed with the Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome: a genetically male condition but resistant to androgens (male sex hormones) which makes the body appear externally female. "

What's the procedure with the official sex tests? Do the officials give the athlete the all the test results or do they just communicate their pass/fail decision without explaining the details of the test?

correction: Therefore, they don't encompass -every...

2009-09-22T00:51:14.120+02:00

correction:
Therefore, they don't encompass -every- possibility in a clearcut format. Let's hope you will have less trouble reading next time.

Tina wrote: You say that the rules I posted- "do ...

2009-09-22T00:49:06.490+02:00

Tina wrote:
You say that the rules I posted-

"do not encompass all the different possibilities for biological make-ups that differ from what is normal. It is for this reason that the IAAF's current policy is to examine the cases that are not clearly addressed by the list of rules you copied in your email on a case-by-case basis."

What you disingenuously fail to acknowledge is that rules posted DO encompass what is alleged to be Semenya's condition, if as we have been led to believe she has AIS, and would still encompass other conditions that would produce the heightened androgen levels she is reported to have...
=======

Why would my not acknowledging what you posted as encompassing all possibilities be disingenuous? You cannot make an argument without maligning and attacking other's people reasons for posting here? Are you so short of arguments, that you need to sling mud to try to feel like you are not slip-sliding away here?

There is *nothing* disingenuous about explaning that, although I am not an expert on the subject (which you erased from your quote), I am aware that the IAAF analyzes certains cases individually when they are not clearcut according to the rules.

I can't know all the different biological make-ups a person could have to end up with the visual appearance of Semenya, plus all the other intersex profile claims.

It's therefore totally logical for me to assume that, if the IAAF has these few rules, and there are cases where they still need to do a much more complex analysis, their rules don't encompass every possibility.

If you want to accuse others of being disingenuous, why don't you start by looking at your own characterization of what I fail to acknowledge? To characterize me as being "disingenuous" is lame at best.

you wrote:
"Complete or almost complete" AIS...it would all fall to the question of whether or not her AIS is complete enough...and the rules don't define that.

Can you read the end of your sentence, I wonder? The rules *don't define everything*, see? Therefore, they don't encompass possibility in a clearcut format. Let's hope you will have less trouble reading next time.

In a South African context, until 2006 we were arg...

2009-09-21T15:06:07.810+02:00

In a South African context, until 2006 we were arguably not considered "natural persons". Damage to our bodies was arguably destruction of property - as persona ficta we owned our own bodies - and possibly cruelty to animals, but not assault or murder.

From the Mail and Guardian - Intersex and the Law :

Our Equality Clause rules discrimination on certain listed grounds, including sex, unfair unless and until proved fair, but "sex" was not defined in statute. The dictionary definition of "sex" -- male, female and nothing else -- therefore governed its interpretation. "Human being" and "[natural] person" are also defined as having a sex in exclusively binary terms. The intersexed, somewhere in between, could thus be argued to be neither human beings nor natural persons.

The potential consequences were terrifying.
...
In South African law, one needs locus standi, the right to address the court, to mount a legal challenge. Since the intersexed did not fit workaday definitions of "human beings" and "[natural] persons", arguably they lacked the locus standi to challenge this or any other type of discrimination. It followed that the intersexed, because they were intersexed, had no secure rights -- not even to dignity or to life itself.

This situation was quietly remedied as a matter of some urgency, before some canny lawyer picked up on it. While this legal theory was never tested in court, the danger was considered real enough for legislation to be hurriedly passed to prevent it.

You can see what we're up against.

Another anomaly has just occurred to me. I have d...

2009-09-21T14:59:02.036+02:00

Another anomaly has just occurred to me.

I have dual nationality. My country of birth is the UK, my country of residence, Australia.

In 1985 I was diagnosed as an Intersexed male, in 2005 an Intersexed female. I've had both gonadectomy (possibly twice), and genital reconstruction surgery. So it's at least arguable that I should be covered by the rules on sex reassignment.

The Stockholm recommendations adopted by the IAAF say, in part:

The group recommends that individuals undergoing sex reassignment from male to female after puberty (and the converse) be eligible for participation in female or male competitions, respectively, under the following conditions:

- Surgical anatomical changes have been completed, including external
genitalia changes and gonadectomy

- Legal recognition of their assigned sex has been conferred by the appropriate official authorities

- Hormonal therapy appropriate for the assigned sex has been administered in a verifiable manner and for a sufficient length of time to minimise gender-related advantages in sport competitions.

In the opinion of the group, eligibility should begin no sooner than two years after gonadectomy.

All well and good. If I were competing for the UK, the "appropriate authorities" would seem to be the Public Records Office. If for Australia, the Department of Immigration. Plus possibly national sports bodies, but let's leave that aside.

In Australia, the "Cardinal Document", dictating what sex I am for all legal purposes, is my Immigration record. According to that, I'm female.

In the UK, the "Cardinal Document" is my Birth Certificate - which unless they change the law, will always say "Boy", as it's deemed to be a historical record, not reflecting current status. Nonetheless, it's used as such.

So for the purposes of sport, which sex I am depends on which country I'm competing for.

If Tina seems a little prickly, then perhaps you might just understand why. Because this is just the Same Old... Used Food... that Intersexed people have to put up with whenever we apply for a drivers license, a job, a passport, a marriage license....

And if you think Ms Semenya hasn't been accused of cheating, I suggest you look at what's been said by some of those she beat - before being silenced by their own athletic bodies. Or what's been said throughout the world in newspapers, TV reports, radio shows.... not forgetting comments on this very site. To say that she hasn't been formally accused of cheating would be equally disingenuous: even those who fail doping tests are not - they are merely disqualified without comment.

The WADA has a "strict liability" rule when it comes to even endrogenous controlled substances: for testosterone, it's the detection of 4 times the expected norm for that person. Anyone above that, for whatever reason is "deemed to have failed a doping test", regardless of cause or liability. Depending on how for that person and expected norm are interpreted, Ms Semenya may indeed have "failed a doping test". With all that that entails.

As regards drugs that "mask" testosterone, well, they don't. Such anti-androgens (temporarily) suppress the body's natural production.

I know, I have to take them myself - despite having no gonads, and a low testosterone count. It seems my "funny looking" adrenals are producing either DHT or some other androgenic substance not detected by the usual tests.

Cyproterone acetate is the usual. In Australia, it can only be prescribed to those who put themselves on a voluntary register of sex-offenders undergoing chemical castration to reduce their sentences, or to women with severe androgenisation. I had to take the stuff for my own health, but until the diagnosis was formally changed, I had to be put on the register.

And once on, you can never get off it.

Intersexed people have to go through such humiliations all the time. Ones those who are Intrasexed could never dream of.

(contd. from previous post) I have been careful t...

2009-09-21T01:22:49.953+02:00

(contd. from previous post)

I have been careful to link to supporting evidence re: the actual IAAF rules I used to base my opinion on, yet you speak of "accepted emails" with no proof of their existence besides nebulous "leaks" and make comments like "We don't have these mysterious sex test results yet, but it just smells like Semenya has a significant advantage" as if "it just smells like" cheating should be accepted without question and is based on anything more than speculation over data of dubious accuracy.

I am more than willing to admit that I do not have all the information or answers and that it may turn out that Semenya did in fact cheat...I really don't think so based on what I have seen and heard (which is what you are going on), but I will admit the possibility that I may be wrong, it's happened before.

So my question to you is this- are you willing to admit that your assessment of what are by your own admission unsubstantiated allegations of Semenya being IS (or else you wouldn't have demanded that *I* substantiate them, would you?) might in fact be incorrect?

Other than a handful of qualifying phrases like "If the info below is correct" the bulk of your posts seem to indicate that you don't believe for a minute that it is possible that Semenya didn't cheat.

Alessandra- you asked- Why did he lie about the ...

2009-09-21T01:21:44.627+02:00

Alessandra-

you asked-

Why did he lie about the tests, Tina?

You also say, "I guess you don't like to read what other people write."

Well, I guess neither do you- Cheune has been quite clear and forthcoming in explaining his reasoning, in quotes that accompany practically every article on this development-

"Athletics South Africa president Leonard Cheune, admits that he was aware gender tests were carried out on South African running sensation Caster Semenya while she was in South Africa, before the recent World Championships, but publicly denied knowledge of the tests to protect the athlete.

"I believed at the time my consistent denials would help protect her," says Chuene reports the BBC.

"I have however realised that it was an error of judgment and that I could have been more forthcoming with this information, even if it was difficult."

Right or wrong, there's the answer you should be demanding from the source, not me....especially considering that I see you already quoted him as well...why on earth are you grilling me as to what his motivations were when the only person who could possibly know, and who is responsible for the explanation you are already WELL aware of, is NOT me?

Rhetorical question of course, it's because you are willing to toss logic and reason and fair play out the window in an attempt to discredit a differing opinion. Ironic, to say the least.

As for the rest of your post, Zoe has pretty well answered your question as to why any alleged tests were not made public or presented to the IAAF when she said-

"That's what happens to Intersexed people. The rules get ignored. They get labelled as cheats and disqualified whenever their condition is publicised".

As for your double standard where you claim that (in your own words) "allegations" "based on leaked emails" (that you have not produced and until then are 100% hearsay) somehow make an unassailable case that Semenya is a cheat because she is intersexed...but then turn around and demand that I "show that the tests prove [my] intersex condition theory"...

well, that's just silly- for the sake of argument I accept the idea that the reports are true and she's intersexed and by my reading of the rules state an opinion that she's likely not cheating, and you attack my having accepted (for the sake of argument) the exact same alleged IS test results that you are using to make the case that she did cheat........?

This makes no logical sense at all.

Zoe is absolutely correct when she says that none of us have anything to go on but "data of dubious accuracy" and that all of this is a matter of conjecture at this point...something I said long ago, that you keep disagreeing with when it supports your opinion, and agree with when you think it can discredit mine.

Indian 800m runner Santhi Soundarajan was stripped...

2009-09-20T23:47:00.217+02:00

Indian 800m runner Santhi Soundarajan was stripped of her silver medal at the 2006 Asian Games after failing a gender test. She was later diagnosed with the Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome: a genetically male condition but resistant to androgens (male sex hormones) which makes the body appear externally female.

Source: AFP, Fox News, Times of India

Chromosome testing in the past has had some embarrassing results:

The first athlete to fail a sex test was Polish sprinter Eva Klobukowska in 1967, winner of a 4x100 relay gold at the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. She passed a gynecological sex test inspection in 1965 but failed a sex chromosome test introduced the next year. She had one chromosome too many to be declared a woman for the purposes of competition and she was banned.

A few years later, Klobukowska gave birth.

See how this might lead to the games falling into disrepute?

I think it would be a good idea to step back for a...

2009-09-20T23:36:28.286+02:00

I think it would be a good idea to step back for a second and realise that we (and by that I mean myself too) are all speculating on the grounds of incomplete and unreliable information.

We have only 3 pieces of data of dubious accuracy.

1. That in the locker room, Ms Semenya excites no suspicion, anatomically. But then, close inspection of genitalia there is not the norm. We know not what any inspection during the urine tests revealed.

2. That she has "internal testes"

3. That she has "three times the norm" of testosterone, but whether that's three times the high 3SD range, or three times the average, we don't know.

From their track record, I wouldn't put any great weight on anything the ASA may say or not say about it. They are an unreliable source.

Ross- you say- "No one has accused Semenya of ch...

2009-09-20T21:40:27.470+02:00

Ross-

you say-

"No one has accused Semenya of cheating"

absolute unmitigated balderdash- commentators all over the world have done so, and even if you want to only consider what has been said in this blog, Allessandra posted this-

"But apparently Ms/Mr Semenya did cheat.

If what is being reported in various papers is true, SA officials knew the rules of the competition and Semenya did as well. They all knew about her intersex condition before Berlin (whatever it is), and they cheated by enrolling her/him in a category Semenya doesn't belong to. Whether they agree or not with the reasoning behind the two-sex sport division is irrelevant to their dishonest behavior.

Yet in spite of this black and white accusation of cheating you accuse *me* of being "dreadful to discuss things with, because you lack any level of objectivity".

not only does your assertion that "No one has accused Semenya of cheating" utterly fail under scrutiny, it betrays either a complete lack of objectivity and intellectual honesty, or monumentally poor reading skills.

as for this-

find where I have said she is 'cheating'

how's about you find where *I* have EVER accused *you* personally of doing so...

"making up your own arguments and then fighting them", indeed...that's rich.

It's not all about you, Ross.

Since you have once and for all proven an unwillingness to debate this matter in a fair and intellectually honest manner, I will abstain from any further interaction with you...

but thanks for illustrating so perfectly the FACT that when it comes to these matters, anyone speaking from a gender variant perspective will invariably be faced with personal attacks and character judgments, and that the people doing so will outright LIE in an attempt to discredit and marginalize opinions that differ from theirs, as you did when you claimed that "No one has accused Semenya of cheating" as a basis for speciously attacking my objectivity.

Unbelievable.

Zoe Brain said... "Because that's what's happened...

2009-09-20T21:03:18.260+02:00

Zoe Brain said...
"Because that's what's happened in the past.

Santhi Soundarajan was stripped of her medals even before testing that revealed she had allowable AIS.

Simply because she had 46xy chromosomes.

That's what happens to Intersexed people. The rules get ignored. They get labelled as cheats and disqualified whenever their condition is publicised.

When it's kept private, as in the 8 cases in 1996, they're not treated that way.

Why this should be so, one can only speculate."
==============
I don't know much about the Santhi case, but I don't think the two cases are anywhere similar. As far as I read in the press, the Indian Athletics people never did any testing, never claimed to have done any testing, and have never been found guilty of lying about having tested their own athlete.

In this sense, the Santhi case has not been disproved by further testing. (or do you have a link to further tests on Santhi?)

I also found this:
"Soundarajan was dumped by insensitive sports officials, who have yet to make public the findings of an investigation carried out to determine the Indian's gender."

Are you saying the tests have been made public? Do you have the link to the results?

If there was any dispute to the tests done in the Asian championship, wouldn't it be an easy for Indian Athletics to carry out their own tests and counter-prove that Santhi is eligible to run as a woman?

I didn't see any press articles reporting this (although it may just be that I didn't find more info). I hadn't read anything about it before anyways, so I didn't follow it.

I've already read comments from a very decorated d...

2009-09-20T20:20:51.173+02:00

I've already read comments from a very decorated dr on intersex conditions, and he does not believe Semenya suffers from AIS, her dark voice and otherwise male features is not what you'd expect from someone with a high grade of AIS. I can see the logic in that argument. If I had to guess, I'd be willing to bet her case more like that of the Austrian skiier who had male genitals, intact inside the abdomen. If she had AIS like those other woman who were allowed to compete before her, there would not have been this long wait for experts to review the findings, there would have been nothing unique about it and the IAAF would see it as a clear cut case of another high grade AIS athlete, who does not benefit from her condition.

My two cents anyway. ..

Ross - Tour father was a hamster, and your mother ...

2009-09-20T17:38:23.602+02:00

Ross - Tour father was a hamster, and your mother smelt of elderberries!

Or was that the reverse? Anyway now that I've engaged in the obligatory attacking and mudslinging, on to the real argument.

There were 3,512 female athletes in Atlanta, 1996. So my estimate of 4,000 was a little high.

1 had 5ARD, 7 had AIS, either CAIS or more likely, PAIS 5 or 6. Truly complete AIS means that they'd be disadvantaged compared with intrasexed women, who would have higher effective natural testosterone levels.

That's about 1 in 450.

What evidence do we have that would support the conjecture that allowing Intersexed women to compete would allow them to dominate the games? Do you think that Intersexed women who know of their condition - and many do not - would suddenly decide to travel the long, hard, gruelling path that is the lot of the "amateur" (Ha!) athlete these days, simply because they may have some advantage?

1 in 450 isn't exactly dominating - especially since the natural rate of AIS and 5ARD put together is about 1 in 18,000.

You know far more about sports medicine than I do. That wouldn't be hard, I know very little. So could you tell me what other congenital conditions cause someone to be automatically disqualified from competing, because they're naturally too good?

Are there any? Any at all?

Or is it that being naturally excellent is deemed praiseworthy?

It seems to me that the original intent of the "sex tests" was purely, as the IAAF put it in their 1992 policy, "to prevent males from attempting to compete as females."

Such a test was by visual inspection of genitalia.

Such tests would have prevented such cases as that of the Zmbabwe athlete "Samukeliso Sithole" AKA Mduduzi Ngwenya AKA Fadzai Fuzani, and Nazi Germany's "Dora" AKA Herman Ratjen. Unambiguous Men in every sense masquerading as women in a deliberate deception. (Have there ever been any other cases recorded apart from those two?)

So how did we get into this impasse? Well, women don't exactly like strangers examining their genitalia in public, as used to be the case in the notorious "meat market" parades. Chromosome tests by simple mouth-swabs seemed to be a foolproof way of determining sex, without violating dignity.

Except we now know that chromosomes, while a good guide, are not infallible.

Later, when urine tests became mandatory, the visual inspections were re-introduced anyway.

Chromosome tests had some use though - they could prove that a woman with CAH and masculinised genitalia wasn't "really" a man masquerading as a woman.

Ross, again I ask you - what other congenital medical conditions would cause an athletic organisation to request that an athlete cease competing (assumedly because they're too good, rather than it being unacceptably hazardous to their health)?

If there are none - if an athlete is allowed to have a naturally high level of testosterone, or human growth hormone, or more red blood cells, or greater cardiac capacity, or larger feet, or longer femurs than is usual - then why the exception for Intersexed women? I can understand it if their natural effective testosterone levels are in the same range as male athletes, but short of that.... why?

Parenthetically, a case like that of "Samukeliso Sithole" may turn out differently next time. Someone with 46XY chromosomes and either 5ARD or 17BHDD may indeed appear to "grow male genitalia" even though the rest of the body is somewhat feminised. No "traditional healer" casting spells need be involved.

Given my own idiopathic condition, human dichogamy is something I have particular interest in.

Hi all Just another word - I think the facts of t...

2009-09-20T16:17:18.786+02:00

Hi all

Just another word - I think the facts of the case are helpful, and Alessandra has portrayed them accurately, I believe.

I know there was a lot of rumor, Tina, and maybe you've haven't caught the last 2 days in SA (I may be wrong), but it is now clear that tests were done, ASA was advised to withdraw her, and they did attempt a cover-up. Please don't accuse me of suggesting Semenya was cheating, but I think a reasonable case of fraud might be made against ASA.

I think that is also what Alessandra is pointing out is that there is much more to this than you may be basing your accusations on. To date, the unconfirmed rumor is that she has AIS - I guess we're all guilty of working with this assumptions, but it does seem increasingly that the problem is a large one.

However, I think we need to find out a lot more before adopting a solid position. The last person in this case who declared with "certainty" what he knew was Chuene, followed by Julius Malema, both who told us they "knew" Semenay was female. Didn't turn out great there.

So a lot of this debate is hypothetical, discussing the philosophical question of whether an intersex athlete with an advantage should compete or not. I think it's been a great discussion, just a request to stay on point, no slanging matches as the passion rises!

Ross

Tina I see someone referred to you as a "wing-nut...

2009-09-20T16:06:22.956+02:00

Tina

I see someone referred to you as a "wing-nut" earlier. You're worse than that.

Honestly, you're just spraying bullets everywhere, so hostile. Like Ross said, your passion is great, but you're making what could be a good discussion into an unpleasant slanging match.

Try to be reasonable and objective. Ross is, Zoe is (sort of), you're a conspiracy theorist.

George

Hi Zoe Yes, Soundarajan, from what I've managed t...

2009-09-20T16:03:25.181+02:00

Hi Zoe

Yes, Soundarajan, from what I've managed to read, sounds like a curious case.

If I read the IAAF policy correctly, they do allow partial AIS, but don't state what the criteria are when 'partial' becomes disallowed.

Interesting to note that the other day, the IAAF said that 8 athletes since 2005 had been tested, 4 had been asked to discontinue running. Soundarajan must be one, which leaves 3 others. I wonder why?

This is something I don't know the answer to. I would love to know the inner workings of those decisions. Certainly, the provision for "partial" AIS allows some, but not other AIS athlete to run.

So, 8 in Atlanta, as you point out, and 7 had AIS, all were allowed to run. 8 since 2005, according to the IAAF, and 4 were allowed to run.

I think it must come down to whether they believe a performance advantage exists. In this regard, this case is not dissimilar to that of Oscar Pistorius, which I've argued quite extensively on this blog in the past. But I must just make the point - they're not always ignored or discriminated against, there certainly seems to be some discretion.

I'll be the first to say that 'discretion' is probably not perfect, but I'm also not aware what criteria are used to assess the cases. But just have to point out that it's not entirely true to say "that's what happens to intersex people", because it seems that sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.

I suspect that will come under attack too, such is the nature of this debate. Which is fine, but I just see it being a little more complex than is being suggested.

Ross

Tina You're doing the same thing again - making u...

2009-09-20T15:55:30.954+02:00

Tina

You're doing the same thing again - making up your own arguments and then fighting them.

No one has accused Semenya of cheating, yet you want to believe this. You're very passionate, it's great, but you're dreadful to discuss things with, because you lack any level of objectivity.

Seriously, find where I have said she is 'cheating'. I am saying that I believe she has an unfair advantage, as a coach, as a follower of the sport, and as an exercise physiologist. That's so different from cheating, I wonder if you even read the post.

Really, you make every feel they're on thin ice. It's unpleasant.

Zoe has been great in her arguments, you're just accusing everyone.

Ross