I figured not working out results in less muscle mass, and as an athlete you'd typically want to work out.
But following that logic trans women would get the exact same benefits from working out as cis women, due to them having the same or even lower T levels? I'm trying to understand your logic here
I was saying that the study might not extrapolate to athletes because the trans women in the study have more reason to avoid working out than the cis women, so the actual participants may already reflect a difference in incentives to work out.
If you compare a population that is less inclined to bulk up to a control population, which population would you expect to be stronger? Do those results extrapolate to when both populations have the same incentive to bulk up?
Yeah I get what you said, I don't understand your point though, the main advantage men have in terms of muscle mass comes from their T levels, trans women have the same if not lower T levels than cis women, so why would they have more muscle mass? Again the one study we do have shows that they have LESS
YeSS it would be nice if we had more studies in regards to this stuff I don't disagree, there is a shocking lack of actual evidence and scientific study when it comes to hormone therapy and everything, but the couple pieces of evidence we DO have show that there isn't a difference. Trans women have been allowed to compete in women's Olympics since the 2000's why haven't they dominated the category? Cause it doesn't make a difference, or at least the differences are so minimal that in practice they might as well not exist
the main advantage men have in terms of muscle mass comes from their T levels
Can you explain what you mean by this, specifically what the advantage you're referring to is?
The conversation might be moot - the study concludes that trans women exhibited stronger grip strength than cis women, however when you divide that by the weight of skeletal + muscle, that result is what's lower than cis men and women.
I don't really know how to apply that knowledge to considering theoretical advantages in sports, even if both populations were athletes. There are some where the stronger grip strength suggests there's an advantage, and there are some where the "density" of that strength matters more. The study (only 8 participants, no longitudal aspect whatsoever) just doesn't seem to be the most fitting piece of evidence for what's being discussed.
I figured not working out results in less muscle mass, and as an athlete you'd typically want to work out.
But following that logic trans women would get the exact same benefits from working out as cis women, due to them having the same or even lower T levels? I'm trying to understand your logic here
I was saying that the study might not extrapolate to athletes because the trans women in the study have more reason to avoid working out than the cis women, so the actual participants may already reflect a difference in incentives to work out.
If you compare a population that is less inclined to bulk up to a control population, which population would you expect to be stronger? Do those results extrapolate to when both populations have the same incentive to bulk up?
Yeah I get what you said, I don't understand your point though, the main advantage men have in terms of muscle mass comes from their T levels, trans women have the same if not lower T levels than cis women, so why would they have more muscle mass? Again the one study we do have shows that they have LESS
YeSS it would be nice if we had more studies in regards to this stuff I don't disagree, there is a shocking lack of actual evidence and scientific study when it comes to hormone therapy and everything, but the couple pieces of evidence we DO have show that there isn't a difference. Trans women have been allowed to compete in women's Olympics since the 2000's why haven't they dominated the category? Cause it doesn't make a difference, or at least the differences are so minimal that in practice they might as well not exist
Can you explain what you mean by this, specifically what the advantage you're referring to is?
The conversation might be moot - the study concludes that trans women exhibited stronger grip strength than cis women, however when you divide that by the weight of skeletal + muscle, that result is what's lower than cis men and women.
I don't really know how to apply that knowledge to considering theoretical advantages in sports, even if both populations were athletes. There are some where the stronger grip strength suggests there's an advantage, and there are some where the "density" of that strength matters more. The study (only 8 participants, no longitudal aspect whatsoever) just doesn't seem to be the most fitting piece of evidence for what's being discussed.