,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Re Semenya case. T itself needs to be deposed. Ppl assume higher T-> better performance like a dose-response relationship. The science is far more complex & doesn't support these claims. T folklore lends a “truthiness” to arguments that would otherwise appear as mere contrivances
The ubiquitous & common-sense notion of T as a “super substance” substitutes for evidence, making calls for concrete, empirical details about what T actually does seem puzzling or obtuse.
Because T is coded as natural and in the realm of biology, just mentioning T can lend veneer of science to simple anecdotes. By virtue of seeming to be about biology, "T talk" lends and elevates scientific authority even as it paradoxically obviates the need for evidence.
T-talk along with sloppy science and blatant misrepresentations of the science of sex biology in the writings of IAAF witnesses can make their arguments feel true when the evidence tells a different story.
