IAAF sterilized athletes
In 2012, the IAAF decided that elite female athletes should bring and keep their testosterone levels
below 10 nanomoles/L. In order to comply with the regulations, four athletes were sterilized in 2013.
This was done on behalf of the IAAF in a private clinic in Nice. In retrospect the question is: was that
wise? The CAS ruled in 2018 that the restriction should only apply to the 400, the 400 hurdles. the
800 and the 1500 meters
It concerns four athletes from a developing country with a rare intersex condition called 5 alpha
reductase deficiency. They were born as a girl with internal testicles instead of ovaries. The athletes
only discovered that something was wrong when they were 18 to 20 years old. The IAAf took the four
to a private clinic where surgeons removed the testicles and performed cosmetic surgery on the
outer genitals. The latter was apparently a gift, the first to regain access to the women's competition
after a year.
The doctors involved wrote a scientific article about the procedure -against the will of the IAAF - in
the journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism (2013) According to this publication, the
operation was done with the consent of the athlete. The question is of course what role the promise
of an Olympic ticket played in this decision. Add to that the poverty and the promise of a sponsor.
Wha the surgery acceptable and necessary?
The intervention was unnecessary. The four athletes could also have used medication to lower their
testosterone levels. That way was much more obvious than surgery. The surgery is irreversible and
had medical risks. The authors do not say whether such medication treatment has been offered.
The internal testicles in these 5-Ard intersex women are fully developed. In some cases, patients
with their syndrome can have children through IVF. That road is closed by the operation. The athletes
are sterilized. If the IAAf had wanted to support the athletes, the intervention should definitely have
been postponed. Medication first, surgery after the career. In any case, the athletes could return to
the professional women's competition a year after the operation.
The 2012 rules were declared invalid by the sports court CAS in 2018. There was no scientific base for
these strict rules. Chances are considerable that one or more of the four treated athletes are or were
active on a discipline that is no longer regulated by the IAAf. Just 4 of the 24 Olympic athletic
disciplines are now regulated. As you probably will know that Caster Semenya is not allowed to run
the 800 without testosterone blockers.
I have of course asked both the IAAf and the clinic for information. I wanted to know on what
disciplines the four were active. They refused to answer me stating that this was private information.
A remarkable answer considering that all the medical information is in the publication. One might
think that the IAAF is hiding something. Probably that one or more of the four athletes have been
unnecessarily sterilized in the light of the new rules.
What lessons should we learn from this? Insofar as it is at all ethically acceptable that healthy
athletes are to be treated by surgery, it certainly applies here that the least invasive treatment should be chosen. Medicaties. But the best thing to do is abolisj rules for intersex athletes.
below 10 nanomoles/L. In order to comply with the regulations, four athletes were sterilized in 2013.
This was done on behalf of the IAAF in a private clinic in Nice. In retrospect the question is: was that
wise? The CAS ruled in 2018 that the restriction should only apply to the 400, the 400 hurdles. the
800 and the 1500 meters
It concerns four athletes from a developing country with a rare intersex condition called 5 alpha
reductase deficiency. They were born as a girl with internal testicles instead of ovaries. The athletes
only discovered that something was wrong when they were 18 to 20 years old. The IAAf took the four
to a private clinic where surgeons removed the testicles and performed cosmetic surgery on the
outer genitals. The latter was apparently a gift, the first to regain access to the women's competition
after a year.
The doctors involved wrote a scientific article about the procedure -against the will of the IAAF - in
the journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism (2013) According to this publication, the
operation was done with the consent of the athlete. The question is of course what role the promise
of an Olympic ticket played in this decision. Add to that the poverty and the promise of a sponsor.
Wha the surgery acceptable and necessary?
The intervention was unnecessary. The four athletes could also have used medication to lower their
testosterone levels. That way was much more obvious than surgery. The surgery is irreversible and
had medical risks. The authors do not say whether such medication treatment has been offered.
The internal testicles in these 5-Ard intersex women are fully developed. In some cases, patients
with their syndrome can have children through IVF. That road is closed by the operation. The athletes
are sterilized. If the IAAf had wanted to support the athletes, the intervention should definitely have
been postponed. Medication first, surgery after the career. In any case, the athletes could return to
the professional women's competition a year after the operation.
The 2012 rules were declared invalid by the sports court CAS in 2018. There was no scientific base for
these strict rules. Chances are considerable that one or more of the four treated athletes are or were
active on a discipline that is no longer regulated by the IAAf. Just 4 of the 24 Olympic athletic
disciplines are now regulated. As you probably will know that Caster Semenya is not allowed to run
the 800 without testosterone blockers.
I have of course asked both the IAAf and the clinic for information. I wanted to know on what
disciplines the four were active. They refused to answer me stating that this was private information.
A remarkable answer considering that all the medical information is in the publication. One might
think that the IAAF is hiding something. Probably that one or more of the four athletes have been
unnecessarily sterilized in the light of the new rules.
What lessons should we learn from this? Insofar as it is at all ethically acceptable that healthy
athletes are to be treated by surgery, it certainly applies here that the least invasive treatment should be chosen. Medicaties. But the best thing to do is abolisj rules for intersex athletes.
gepost door Rosa Spier op
12:19
<< Homepage