Genes, Gender, Hormones, and Doping in Sport: A Convoluted Tale

Abstract

We are writing this piece in the aftermath of the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Each of the words in the title plays a role(s) in deciding who may compete, especially who may compete as a woman. We shall be careful to disentangle the issues of genes and gender from hormonal levels of the potent androgen testosterone, and very clearly demarcate these natural occurrences from those of doping, for which the World Anti-Doping Agency has established strict guidelines. These elements became conflated in the aftermath of the Court of Arbitration of Sport’s decision, now more than 2 years ago, concerning the teenage Indian sprinter, Dutee Chand. Although many people associate hyperandrogenism with doping and gender determination, each is different and has a distinct function.

Annual banned‐substance review: Analytical approaches in human sports drug testing

“…Extensive debates have continued around the topic of genetic predisposition as well as gene manipulation in sport, and rather different issues have been discussed with one calling into question the rules for who may compete in women's sports, another addressing the relevance of genes and an athlete's environment in an individual's development from a talented athlete to a champion, and the necessity and means to monitor gene doping practices in elite sport . A variety of test methods targeting transgenic DNA in doping control samples have been established, largely relying on conventional PCR‐based strategies.…”

The Interconnected Histories of Endocrinology and Eligibility in Women’s Sport

“…The organization established a 10 nmol/L cutoff for participants in the women’s division, which the International Olympic Committee (IOC) adopted for the 2012 London Olympics. Critics of the policy argue that testosterone is only one factor of many involved in sporting prowess; moreover, naturally produced testosterone is a biological advantage akin to many genetic advantages, for example, tall height [2-5]. Opponents also likened the policy to previous forms of sex testing [6].…”