Search

Sport is historically designated by the binary categorization of male and female that conflicts with modern society. Sport’s governing bodies should consider reviewing rules determining the eligibility of athletes in the female category as there may be lasting advantages of previously high testosterone concentrations for transwomen athletes and currently high testosterone concentrations in differences in sex development (DSD) athletes. The use of serum testosterone concentrations to regulate the inclusion of such athletes into the elite female category is currently the objective biomarker that is supported by most available scientific literature, but it has limitations due to the lack of sports performance data before, during or after testosterone suppression. Innovative research studies are needed to identify other biomarkers of testosterone sensitivity/responsiveness, including molecular tools to determine the functional status of androgen receptors. The scientific community also needs to conduct longitudinal studies with specific control groups to generate the biological and sports performance data for individual sports to inform the fair inclusion or exclusion of these athletes. Eligibility of each athlete to a sport-specific policy needs to be based on peer-reviewed scientific evidence made available to policymakers from all scientific communities. However, even the most evidence-based regulations are unlikely to eliminate all differences in performance between cisgender women with and without DSD and transwomen athletes. Any remaining advantage held by transwomen or DSD women could be considered as part of the athlete’s unique makeup.

The IOC recently published its framework on fairness, inclusion and non-discrimination based on gender identity and sex variations. This framework is drafted mainly from a human rights perspective, with less consideration for medical/scientific issues. The framework places the onus for gender eligibility and classification entirely on the International Federations (IFs), even though most will not have the capacity to implement the framework. The position of no presumption of advantage is contrary to the 2015 IOC consensus. Implementation of the 2021 framework will be a major challenge for IFs that have already recognised the inclusion of trans and women athletes with differences of sexual development (DSD) using a scientific/medical solution. The potential consequences for sports that need to prioritise fairness or safety could be one of two extremes (1) exclusion of all transgender or DSD athletes on the grounds of advantage or (2) self-identification that essentially equates to no eligibility rules. Exclusion of all transgender or DSD athletes is contrary to the Olympic charter and unlawful in many countries. While having no gender eligibility rules, sport loses its meaning and near-universal support. Athletes should not be under pressure to undergo medical procedures or treatment to meet eligibility criteria. However, if an athlete is fully informed and consents, then it is their free choice to undergo carefully considered or necessary interventions for gender classification for sport to compete fairly and safely in their chosen gender. Free choice is a fundamental human right, but so is the right to fair and safe competition., publishedVersion

Rapid advances in technologies in the field of genomics such as high throughput DNA sequencing, big data processing by machine learning algorithms and gene-editing techniques are expected to make precision medicine and gene-therapy a greater reality. However, this development will raise many important new issues, including ethical, moral, social and privacy issues. The field of exercise genomics has also advanced by incorporating these innovative technologies. There is therefore an urgent need for guiding references for sport and exercise genomics to allow the necessary advancements in this field of sport and exercise medicine, while protecting athletes from any invasion of privacy and misuse of their genomic information. Here, we update a previous consensus and develop a guiding reference for sport and exercise genomics based on a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis. This SWOT analysis and the developed guiding reference highlight the need for scientists/clinicians to be well-versed in ethics and data protection policy to advance sport and exercise genomics without compromising the privacy of athletes and the efforts of international sports federations. Conducting research based on the present guiding reference will mitigate to a great extent the risks brought about by inappropriate use of genomic information and allow further development of sport and exercise genomics in accordance with best ethical standards and international data protection principles and policies. This guiding reference should regularly be updated on the basis of new information emerging from the area of sport and exercise medicine as well as from the developments and challenges in genomics of health and disease in general in order to best protect the athletes, patients and all other relevant stakeholders.

COVID-19 AND RETURN TO PLAY The world of sport has recently returned to training and competition following suspension due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is concerning that a number of athletes have tested positive for COVID-19 after returning to competition. 1 Numerous authors have attempted to address return to play given the importance and complexity of the issue, with notable attention on possible cardiac implications.2–6 SCOPE OF THE INFOGRAPHIC The specific recommendations shown in the present infographic (figure 1) have been generated by a panel of international experts and represent a compilation of the numerous approaches used to inform resumption of regular sports during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the different regulations around the world and the particular characteristics of each sport, it is essential to provide informative, consistent and specific guidance for safe return to training and competition at this most difficult time. ...

In an effort to reduce transmission and number of infections of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) virus, governments and official bodies around the world have produced guidelines on the use of face masks and face coverings. While there is a growing body of recommendations for healthcare professionals and the wider population to use facial protection in “enclosed spaces” where minimal distancing from other individuals is not possible, there is a dearth of clear guidelines for individuals undertaking exercise and sporting activity. The present viewpoint aims to propose recommendations for face coverings while exercising during the COVID-19 pandemic that consider physical distancing, the environment, the density of active cases associated with the specific sports activity, and the practical use of face coverings in order to reduce potential viral transmission. Recommendations are provided on the basis of very limited available evidence in conjunction with the extensive collective clinical experience of the authors and acknowledging the need to consider the likelihood of the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 in the general population. We recommend that face coverings should be used in any environment considered to be of a high or moderate transmission risk, where tolerated and after individual risk assessment. In addition, as national caseloads fluctuate, individual sporting bodies should consider up to date guidance on the use of face coverings during sport and exercise, alongside other preventative measures.

Sport is historically designated by the binary categorization of male and female that conflicts with modern society. Sport's governing bodies should consider reviewing rules determining the eligibility of athletes in the female category as there may be lasting advantages of previously high testosterone concentrations for transwomen athletes and currently high testosterone concentrations in differences in sex development (DSD) athletes. The use of serum testosterone concentrations to regulate the inclusion of such athletes into the elite female category is currently the objective biomarker that is supported by most available scientific literature, but it has limitations due to the lack of sports performance data before, during or after testosterone suppression. Innovative research studies are needed to identify other biomarkers of testosterone sensitivity/responsiveness, including molecular tools to determine the functional status of androgen receptors. The scientific community also needs to conduct longitudinal studies with specific control groups to generate the biological and sports performance data for individual sports to inform the fair inclusion or exclusion of these athletes. Eligibility of each athlete to a sport-specific policy needs to be based on peer-reviewed scientific evidence made available to policymakers from all scientific communities. However, even the most evidence-based regulations are unlikely to eliminate all differences in performance between cisgender women with and without DSD and transwomen athletes. Any remaining advantage held by transwomen or DSD women could be considered as part of the athlete's unique makeup.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created many challenges to ensure a safe environment for competitive sport. While modern medicine has already developed effective protocols for the treatment and prevention of the disease, there are serious concerns about hosting a sporting event of the scale of the Olympic Games, where more than 11 000 athletes from over 200 nations are expected to participate. Accordingly, there have been many calls to cancel the Tokyo Olympic Games, also known as Tokyo 2020, in both the international press and the scientific literature. A recent perspective published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM)1 highlights the complexity and risks of convening the Tokyo Olympic Games during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the many uncertainties,1 much has been learnt over the past 18 months and many policies trialled and tested to protect athletes during sports participation. To develop a rapid understanding of the perspectives from the international sports and exercise medicine community, an informal survey of the International Federation of Sports Medicine (FIMS) Executive Committee, Commissions, and Collaborating Centres of Sports Medicine agreed that the Tokyo Olympic Games could go ahead safely based on the plans addressing the pandemic developed by the IOC (figure 1). This international network of 26 research laboratories and clinics has a mission to promote best practice …

At the end of 2019, a new coronavirus (Covid-19) outbreak occurred in Wuhan, China, and spread throughout the world despite efforts to contain the virus. At the end of January 2020, the General Director of the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, and by mid-May 2020, the worldwide number of known Covid-19 cases had surpassed 4.4 million including more than 300,000 deaths...

In this viewpoint we make specific recommendations that can assist and make the return to sport/exercise as safe as possible for all those impacted – from the recreational athlete to the elite athlete. We acknowledge that there are varying rules and regulations around the world, not to mention the varying philosophies and numerous schools of thought as it relates to return to sport/exercise and we have been cognisant of this in our recommendations. Despite the varying rules and circumstances around the world, we believe it is essential to provide some helpful and consistent guidance for return to training and sport for sport and exercise physicians around the world at this most difficult time. The present viewpoint provides practical and medical recommendations on the resumption to sport process.