@KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg Okay, so you haven't read the study in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, you've read a Guardian story about it.

I have now read the study, and I teach critical appraisal as part of my job, so let's dive into it a bit.

@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg First things first, the sample size in this study is tiny. 46 people. Plus, the point of comparison was "all women and men under the age of 30 in the Air Force between 2004 and 2014" rather than a longitudinal group.
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg So no matching for age, background, or physical condition. The result of these is that you're going to get a lot of statistical artefacts.
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg Second of all, there were three points of comparison here and you're ignoring two of them. The researchers measured for push-ups and sit-ups as well, both of which showed physical advantage removed entirely by hormones. Which means you're cherrypicking.
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg So what do you get when you have a tiny sample size and cherrypicked results? That's right, you get noise in the data. Take a look at the results graph from this paper you haven't read.
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg You'll notice in the times for the 1.5 minute mile that the mean times go pretransition 708, 0-1 years 758, 1-2 years 791, 2-2.5 years 765. So the data seems to think that trans people get... faster after two years? What?
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg And why does the 2-2.5 years category exist? Why not 2-3? Or for that matter why include over 2 years at all, especially when it contains this odd anomalous reading?
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg What's also notable is that there is clearly an outlier in the 2.5 year readings. In the range for the 1.5 minute mile, the fastest time goes from 753s in the 1-2 years category to 685s in the 2-2.5 year category. That's an anomaly, and one the paper never mentions.
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg Had I been conducting this study, that anomaly would have been enough for me to question my data. if I'm being charitable I'd say that perhaps they didn't notice. If I'm not being charitable I'd say perhaps the anomaly was the point.
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg In summary, nothing here is strong enough to base very much on.
@br0oklynzo0 @KatyMontgomerie @ElPolloDiabloX @AbigailShrier @chadfelixg incidentally, MLA citation:

Roberts, Timothy A., Joshua Smalley, and Dale Ahrendt. "Effect of gender affirming hormones on athletic performance in transwomen and transmen: implications for sporting organisations and legislators." British Journal of Sports Medicine (2020).

More from Health

Some thoughts on this: Firstly, it might be personal preference, but I am not keen on this kind of campaign as I feel like it trivialises cancer. Sometimes the serious message gets lost because people are sharing pics of cats or whatever and the important context is gone.


More importantly, the statistic being used in the campaign is misleading. It says 57% of women put off cervical screening if they can't get waxed. But on further investigation, that's not accurate.

The page here goes on to say "57% of women who regularly have their pubic hair professionally removed would put off attending their cervical screening appointment if they hadn’t been able to visit a beauty salon."

So the 57% represents a concern not across the whole population of women, but only those who regularly get waxed. So how big of an issue is this across the whole population? And what else is stopping people getting smears?

I think campaigns for cancer screening are really tricky because there is so much nuance that often doesn't fit into a catchy headline or hashtag. It's certainly not easy and is part of a bigger conversation.

You May Also Like

A THREAD ON @SarangSood

Decoded his way of analysis/logics for everyone to easily understand.

Have covered:
1. Analysis of volatility, how to foresee/signs.
2. Workbook
3. When to sell options
4. Diff category of days
5. How movement of option prices tell us what will happen

1. Keeps following volatility super closely.

Makes 7-8 different strategies to give him a sense of what's going on.

Whichever gives highest profit he trades in.


2. Theta falls when market moves.
Falls where market is headed towards not on our original position.


3. If you're an options seller then sell only when volatility is dropping, there is a high probability of you making the right trade and getting profit as a result

He believes in a market operator, if market mover sells volatility Sarang Sir joins him.


4. Theta decay vs Fall in vega

Sell when Vega is falling rather than for theta decay. You won't be trapped and higher probability of making profit.
I’m torn on how to approach the idea of luck. I’m the first to admit that I am one of the luckiest people on the planet. To be born into a prosperous American family in 1960 with smart parents is to start life on third base. The odds against my very existence are astronomical.


I’ve always felt that the luckiest people I know had a talent for recognizing circumstances, not of their own making, that were conducive to a favorable outcome and their ability to quickly take advantage of them.

In other words, dumb luck was just that, it required no awareness on the person’s part, whereas “smart” luck involved awareness followed by action before the circumstances changed.

So, was I “lucky” to be born when I was—nothing I had any control over—and that I came of age just as huge databases and computers were advancing to the point where I could use those tools to write “What Works on Wall Street?” Absolutely.

Was I lucky to start my stock market investments near the peak of interest rates which allowed me to spend the majority of my adult life in a falling rate environment? Yup.