Roughly 50,000 runners are jamming the streets of New York this Sunday morning for the annual New York City Marathon. This year, for only the third time, the marathon includes a nonbinary category and 96 people registered for it. Cal Calamia, 27—a trans and nonbinary runner who uses both he and they pronouns – is one of them.

Racing in the nonbinary category, Calamia won the 2022 San Francisco marathon and went on to claim second in the Chicago marathon and the 2023 Boston marathon. In the latter, the New York Times noted that Calamia’s advocacy played a role in driving Boston to include a nonbinary category for the first time.

“I was just on cloud nine,” said Calamia, referring to these first experiences racing in the nonbinary category. “The possibility to participate in nonbinary divisions and then rally community support to make them better,” he added, “I just was like, this is living.”

But this past summer, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) reached out to Calamia. The agency had been notified that he was using a prohibited substance: testosterone. Calamia, who takes testosterone as gender affirming hormone therapy, learned that in order to continue racing he had to attain a therapeutic use exemption (or TUE) from USADA. The exemption grants athletes who need prohibited substances as medication permission to compete.

The requirements, however, are extensive. The exemption application calls for trans athletes to send in numerous documents, including a full medical history with psychological records pertaining to a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Documentation of sex reassignment surgery—which is unrelated to hormone levels—is also mandatory.

“The whole thing hinges upon this diagnosis, the idea that being trans is a disorder,” said Calamia.

Calamia decided to submit his TUE application, but withhold his full psychiatric and medical records, instead substituting alternative provider notes and supplemental materials. It was a risky decision—one that potentially jeopardized Calamia’s ability to compete in future marathons. But from his perspective, withholding the full materials was about protecting the privacy of future trans and nonbinary competitors seeking exemptions.

“I don’t want to set a precedent that this is a normal amount of information to submit to this agency to even show up to a race,” he said. “There’s no way.”

USADA could not comment on Calamia’s case. But the agency’s chief science officer Matthew Fedoruk said that the ban on testosterone is based on peer reviewed studies that conclude that high doses of synthetic testosterone can function as performance enhancing drugs. It’s important to note that people doing hormone replacement therapy for gender-affirming care typically use much lower doses than those cited in these studies.

Fedoruk acknowledged the exemption process can be “onerous” for athletes and stressed that the agency tries to collaborate with athletes and support them through the process.

However, for weeks after submitting his application, Calamia waited for communication from USADA and heard nothing.

The idea that testosterone is “performance enhancing” is itself controversial. While there are scientists who believe higher levels of testosterone—naturally occurring or synthetic—improve athletic ability, there are other researchers who challenge this claim. Anthropologist Katrina Karkazis, a coauthor with Rebecca Jordan-Young of the book Testosterone: an Unauthorized Biography, said the current studies on testosterone’s effects on athletes show wide ranging effects.

“Sometimes people with higher levels do better,” Karkazis says. “Sometimes people with higher levels do the same. And sometimes people with higher levels do worse.”

Currently, Karkazis says, there is very little research on the impact of testosterone on transmasculine athletes. And more broadly, while it’s clear that testosterone can impact athletic ability, it remains unclear how much, in what context, and under what circumstances.

There are also plenty of lingering questions about the role physical, social and psychological factors play in athletics, Karkazis says. In some cases, these factors could play a more significant role than testosterone on performance.

In early October, Calamia finally heard back from USADA. After exceeding its own deadline of 21 days, USADA emailed Calamia and granted him a 10-year exemption which allows him to run in both the men’s and nonbinary categories.

“I just want to cry with how relieved I feel that I can run my race and not feel like I’m doing something wrong for just being there,” Calamia told NPR the day he received the exemption.

It’s unclear whether this decision is a sign the anti-doping agency is permanently reducing its requirements for testosterone exemptions among trans and nonbinary athletes. Some advocates told NPR that going forward, they hope that the application process will be less invasive and more turnkey for trans athletes. NPR has learned that the World Anti-Doping Agency, of which USADA is the U.S. branch, is currently re-evaluating its processes for trans and nonbinary athletes and actively gathering feedback on its therapeutic use exemption process.

But for now, one thing is certain—Calamia can compete. “I feel optimistic again that change is possible and that change is going to happen,” he said.

Source : NPR

The post A Nonbinary Marathoner’s Fight to Change Anti-Doping Policy appeared first on Policy Print.

Brandon Young just wanted to get on the damn school bus.

The teenager had severely dislocated his kneecap during football practice at Cardinal Ambrozic Catholic Secondary School in Brampton and was on crutches.

But the bus driver wouldn’t let him board. “Why not?” He asked. “Because of the crutches,” she responded. “How am I going to get home?” Driver, according to Brandon: “I can’t help you with that. The rule is that of the bus company.”

Brandon’s friend — a white boy, Brandon is Black — tried to intervene. “Why can’t Brandon go on the bus if he’s not doing anything wrong or bad with his crutches?” The driver relented, partly. Brandon could board but he’d have to sit at the front, near her.

Next day, same school bus, same driver. No ally around this time. “You’re not allowed on the bus with crutches.” But why not, countered Brandon, when he’d been permitted the day before? The driver relayed instructions she’d been given by her office: “Kids with crutches are not allowed on the bus because they can be used as a weapon.” She then called her dispatcher and that information was confirmed.

Yet Brandon was able to board another school bus shortly afterward, a vehicle that followed a different route, which dropped him far from his home. “It took him 45 minutes to walk home on his crutches while carrying his backpack,” Brandon’s irate father, Richard Young, told the Star. “Not only was he separated from his sister who would have assisted him with his school bag but he was in severe pain once he made it home. What if he had fallen down? What if he’d collapsed and needed assistance?

“When I arrived home, Brandon was in a tremendous amount of pain in both of his legs and his originally injured knee was severely swollen.”

Brandon’s mother, Erica, called the school and left a detailed message. No response. Richard called the school the following day. No response. It was only after Brandon’s football coach stepped in, contacted by Richard, that things started to move. The vice-principal called and they devised a temporary plan — Brandon was offered a taxi to and from school every day, while the matter was under discussion with the school bus company. This went on for more than three weeks.

To be clear: Crutches are medical devices for a disability. They’re not weapons. And if they could be used as a weapon, so might anything else brought on a school bus. Crutches, in fact, aren’t mentioned anywhere on the Student Transportation of Peel Region (STOPR) website, which specifically lists the “projectiles” banned. They include skate blades (unless covered by guards), skis and poles, hockey equipment, musical instruments that can’t be carried on a student’s lap, skateboards, scooters and roller blades.

Nothing about crutches.

Brandon is an honour roll student and school athlete. There’s never been a hint of trouble with the youth. He was injured on school property.

Describing crutches as a “weapon” is a ridiculous overreach.

“If a child is eligible for a school bus and they break their leg, we still have to get them to school,” notes Roy Wierenga, manager of transportation for the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board. The province’s ministry of transportation mandated many years ago that school boards provide bus transportation however they can set their own directives.

“It’s not safe for a student on crutches to try to negotiate the steps of a school bus,” Wierenga continues. So the board (or school) arranges for temporary transportation in a smaller vehicle until the cast comes off.

“Whatever the driver said, crutches would be considered a projectile. Just like you can’t bring hockey sticks or baseball equipment onto the bus, in the event of an accident,” said Wierenga.

“But we wouldn’t say crutches are a weapon. That doesn’t sound right. There’s some miscommunication there.”

We are in an era of overweening risk aversion. Safety protocols are legitimate but there are doubtless litigation concerns as well, potential lawsuits to be averted for responsibility in the event of an accident.

Wierenga speculated that the driver — English her second language — meant projectile but “maybe the word weapon” was used. “That was certainly the wrong thing to say.”

Bottom line is that a 16-year-old boy on crutches was made to hobble home. Alternate arrangements were subsequently made and Richard applauds the school for arranging it. But he was initially and quite naturally upset at the mischaracterization of crutches as weapons, or even projectiles; that nobody seemed to have a coherent grasp of policy and that a transportation company could impose unilateral restrictions on students.

“I was hot. I was livid,” said Richard. He was only secondarily suspicious of any racist overtone to the driver’s exchange with his son. “That’s part of it. But I’m a little thicker-skinned than the average person. The problem for me is the disconnect here. I didn’t think my son, who is a very good young man, should have been subjected to this behaviour. It was not right. And I don’t want any other parent to have to deal with something like this.”

In fact, such policy on “projectiles” is established at the board level, in conjunction with the transportation company. The Toronto District School Board, for example, has no restrictions on crutches, unless the student is in a full leg cast and can’t navigate the steps at all.

The upshot is that the STOPR driver was directed to give Brandon an apology.

“DPCDSB regrets that this incident occurred and that the student was subjected to an inconvenience as a result of the matter,” said board spokesperson Bruce Campbell. “While crutches are not referenced specifically in the STOPR policy related to prohibited objects … the fact is that crutches could potentially become projectiles in the event of a sudden stop or accident situation and inflict harm on passengers.”

Oh, for the love of prudence.

“Everybody admits they made colossal errors here,” says Richard. “They said, what do you want? I told them, I want for an adult to stand up and acknowledge when they’re wrong. If (the driver) is an adult I want her to apologize to my son in front of his peers for how she handled things. The same way that you embarrassed Brandon in front of his peers, you should correct the mistake in front of his peers.”

STOPR agreed. Brandon was agreeable.

The driver did so on Tuesday. Brandon was called out of class and faced the driver in the principal’s office. Immediately afterward he texted his dad, saying the apology was clearly not sincere.

He told his dad: “That’s the most embarrassing thing I’ve ever been through.”

He tells the Star. “While she was making the apology, she looked like she was just faking it, trying not to laugh. She said to me, I’m sorry for whatever you felt I did to you.

“I said nothing. I had nothing to say after that.

“I just don’t want anyone else to go through what I did with this bus driver.”

Brandon’s cast is now off. The pall from the experience remains.

Source: The Star

The post When terrible policy is at the ‘crutch’ of the issue appeared first on Policy Print.