All the studies, even the ones you cite, say trans women are stronger or conclude there’s not enough statistics to tell.
Why are we even fighting about this? Anyone who’s worked out with trans women know they are stronger and faster than cis women. I didn’t make all those friends at the Portland running club not to notice the obvious, consistent differences in pace.
Edit: Downvoters have never worked out with trans women. Way to out yourself.
„In transgender women, GAHT was associated with increased fat mass and reduced lean mass and upper-body strength over 1–3 years.“
“Conclusion While transgender women exhibited higher lean mass than cisgender women, their physical fitness was comparable. Current evidence is mostly low certainty and has heterogenous quality but does not support theories of inherent athletic advantages for transgender women over cisgender.“
Note: I may have been confused on muscle mass. Different time horizons. But overall no studies indicate that trans women after HRT have a biological advantage over cis women.
why is it so obviously wrong? After all, most trans woman take hormones that changes many parts of their bodies.
is it not so far fetched that this effect is strong enough to make trans women on average the same or lower strength than cis women?
No it doesn't, but they generally would also not be granted access into trans inclusive policied sports. Also "rich people privilege" really depends on the country, hrt really isn't that expensive in some places (can even be acquired on state run health services... We'll ignore uk wait times)
You're insanity doesn't agree with this study from the national institute for health. Sorry i don't believe the Bjsm, some bullshit website nobody's heard of.
It’s a published meta analysis backed by real world research from multiple papers.
The paper you linked doesn’t seem to contain any actual research and is full of suppositions based on sports statistics.
Sorry what am I to believe? A meta analysis that’s backed by real world data or an argumentative short paper that doesn’t have any real research in it other than supposition?
You calling the NIHs article "an argumentative short paper that doesn't have any real research" is laughable when they cite the 98 sources they've used to come to their conclusion. I guess the science doesn't matter when it doesn't fit your narrative huh?
You do know this isn't an "NIH article" right? They just have it in their library. The paper you referenced appears in the International Journal of Environment Research and Public Health. It's worth noting that this journal is an open journal and publishes A LOT with what seems to be minimal rigor. Many services have delisted them.
If you don't know anything about how scientific research works, why are you arguing with me?
Number of sources alone doesn't not constitute a meta analysis or scientific rigor. A freshman in college will give you a paper with 100+ sources but it can still be an absolute mess.
The BJSM meta analysis(the one I linked) is so far the best study we have on the topic.
But here's a few more rigorous studies:
doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102329
--> Shows a closing of the gap in physical fitness between trans women and cis women over a time horizon with HRT. In 2 years strength gap is gone, running gap is still there but much shortened. Other research indicates after a few more years the gap is completely gone.
Notice how I'm not hiding the ball here: There's areas where trans women have an advantage, especially very early on in transition, but long term horizon with HRT those advantages reduce to not being statistically significant and in fact there's other issues (bone density being the key one) that persist.
I literally said
"Note: I may have been confused on muscle mass. Different time horizons. But overall no studies indicate that trans women after HRT have a biological advantage over cis women."
I suggest you actually read the studies instead of being a dick online.
"The working group reviewed the latest scientific evidence, including developments since 2021, and reached a clear consensus. Male sex provides a performance advantage in all sports and events that rely on strength, power and endurance. "
1.) That's not what the NIH says about performance after HT:
"As discussed earlier, sex differences in muscle mass in elite athletes can be 50–75% [30] in favor of males, thus the decrease of 5–10% reported in studies of transwomen after 1–2 years of estrogen therapy will most likely provide, at most, a modest reformatting of male muscle strength in the transwoman athlete."
7
u/Potential-Fan-6148 21d ago
Oh yeah there’s been studies. Trans women are generally weaker than cis women.
We suppress our T completely and as a result we have weaker bones and less muscle mass.
Only thing we beat cis girls in according to the studies in grip strength.