DIGGING A LITTLE DEEPER INTO GENDER TESTING PROCEDURES AND METHODS

Here’s some food for thought, and some contacts for those who want to find out more first-hand from the researchers themselves. I hope the question and answer format will guide you appropriately to the answers you need or to the proper framing of the questions that you’d like more answers to. Here’s the presentation in the following documentation:

[Hans Goerl: ETHI: gender testing responses

archive of HUM-MOLGEN mails

[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Topic Index]

To: Multiple recipients of list HUM-MOLGEN <HUM-MOLGEN@NIC.SURFNET.NL>
Subject: ETHI: gender testing responses
From: Hans Goerl <GENETHICS@delphi.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:21:13 -0500

---

Well, the Olympics are over and I now have had time to review the responses

to my inquiry. There were quite a few duplicates and I thank those whose

responses are not included below.

Hans Goerl

ETHI editor

*****************************************************************************

****************

From:   IN%"Marilyn_Owens@cc.chiron.com"  "Marilyn Owens" 30-JUL-1996

19:36:08.7

     Your inquiry was forwarded to me by a co-worker.  I was responsible

     for the Gender Verification Program at both the Los Angeles 1984

     Olympic Games and the Calgary 1988 Winter Olympic Games.  Our testing

     procedure was mandated by the IOC Medical Commission.

     Briefly:  we obtained multiple buccal smear specimens from each female

     athlete (about 3600 in LA, 1600 in Calgary) which were immediately

     fixed in ethanol for transport to the laboratory.  One slide per

     athlete was stained for Barr bodies and a second (with quinacrine) for

     y chromatin.  All staining batches included blind controls.

     There were no misreads in the controls.  Four athletes had "abnormal"

     results for presumptive XX females in LA: Two XY females, one XO

     mosaic and one XY male!  In Calgary: only one "abnormal", an XO

     mosaic.  These were detected as having "lower than expected" Barr

     bodies and/or presence of y chromatin.  In each case, the athlete was

     called in with coach and team physician for discussion of results, had

     a physical exam, and then some were asked to give blood for a complete

     karyotype.  I don't know if any abnormals were "missed" in this

     process, but I do know that one of our XO mosaics brought in her

     medical files and verified that she was mosaic.

     My understanding is that these tests were eliminated from the Olympic

     Games in the early 1990's.  I believe, although am not certain, that

     routine physical exams have been substituted for the buccal smears.

     Would appreciate your feedback if you obtain any more data on the

     current practice in the Olympics,

     Marilyn Owens

*****************************************************************************

****************

From: Betsy Gettig 

Sechin Cho, MD did the gender testing for the Korean Olympics and has

fascinating stories of the experience.  Athletes who are in previous

Olympics have certificates for testing and therefore are not

re-tested but those new to the Olympics must be tested.  The 1%

figure appears to be correct.  Sechin can be reached at the

University of Kansas -

Louis "Skip" Elsas is doing the testing in Atlanta but I would not

call now as he probably is mega busy. He is at Emory.

*****************************************************************************

******************

From: Teresa Binstock 

I am among the watchers of SRY studies; hopefully as results of Mr.

Goerl's quiry arrive, they shall be shared by posting to the list.

Thank you,

Teresa C. Binstock, Researcher

Developmental & Behavioral Neuroanatomy

B140 Fragile X Section

The Children's Hospital

1056 E. 19th Avenue

Denver CO 80218 USA

*****************************************************************************

******************

From: "" 

You might be interested in reading the collection of related articles in

this week's (17 July, 1996) Journal of the American Medical Association.

Allan T. Bombard, MD

Director, Division of Reproductive Genetics

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center

1695 Eastchester Road, Suite 301

Bronx, NY 190461

*****************************************************************************

********************

From: "Angela Scheuerle, M.D." 

Well, the Olympics were using Barr body testing of cheek scrapings up until

a few years ago.  Doesn't that have a higher error rate than SRY testing?

What was the false positive rate for any gender testing in the past?  And

what confirmatory testing is used?

In a more general sense, the whole purpose of doing 'gender identity'

testing of the women participants seems to be based on a few assumptions 1)

all male athletes are inherently stronger/faster/more coordinated than all

female athletes, and 2) all male athletes would outperform all female

athletes in any given Olympic sport.  I'm not sure that there is support

for 1) given the wide range of somatic variability of people.  Likewise for

2) there are some sports (equestrian events and archery come to mind) in

which gender is probably really irrelevant.

So, texting modality aside, the bigger ethical questions that I see are:

A) Is this sex-discrimination parading as 'protecting the women' since the

male athletes don't have to undergo the testing?

B) Should gender testing only be used in those events which are direct

measures of physical prowess of the athlete and not test those competing in

events that do not divide parcipants by gender such as equestrian, archery

(?), bowling, ping pong, etc.

C) Is any genetic test really more accurate than a thorough standardized

physical exam which is more easily performed and significantly less

expensive? (and has the added benfit of being able to asses the overall

health of the athlete and their fitness to compete.)

D) Understanding that the purpose of testing is to try to 'level the

playing field' (as it were) should we extend catagorization of competitors

in all sports into flyweight -> heavyweight type catagories so that each

athele is competing only against those with whom they are 'fairly' matched?

Lastly, it is less likely that a male athlete would undergo the necessary

modifications to pass as a female than that a female would use anabolic

steroids or other enhancing medications, and use them far enough in advance

that they would be cleared from the system at the time of testing. Should

we take testing so far as to do muscle biopsies on everybody to look for

evidence of steroid use?

-A

Angela E. Scheuerle, M.D.

Assistant Professor

Division of Medical Genetics

Department of Pediatrics

UT Health Science Center - Houston

6431 Fannin, MSB 3.144

Houston TX  77030

ascheuer@ped1.med.uth.tmc.edu

*****************************************************************************

******************

From: David Barton 

Malcolm Ferguson-Smith in Cambridge has been very active in

correspondence and lobbying over this question in the recent past.  You

might want to contact him about current practice and associated problems.

  | Dr David E Barton

  | Chief Scientist & Honorary Lecturer in Molecular Genetics

  | National Centre for Medical Genetics

  | Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children

  | Crumlin, Dublin 12, Ireland.

  | Tel +353 1 455 0515 Fax 455 8873]

SOURCE: http://hum-molgen.org/mail-archive/1996-Aug/msg00003.html