I would say that article is not credible
Perhaps the study itself is but based on statement of "limitations" by the Author it likely is not.
The study you quote states a range of participants ranging from age 14 to 41 who are mostly untrained.
So which results are comparable for lean mass and performance is it pre and post transition, is it against comparably untrained females? What protocols were followed for testing of Aerobic performance and Upper and lower body strength?
The untrained part is significant. A male duffer who transitions is just a trans female duffer. But in sport specifically small percentages matter.
Here is the IOC policy document on retained advantage of Males and the protection of the female category.
This statement was not arrived at casually it sets out the working group studying male advantage and their conclusions which based on trained elite populations were that the retained male advantage is
Magnitude of Advantage: At the elite level, the magnitude of the Male performance advantage is
different depending on the sport or event:
o There is a 10-12 per cent Male performance advantage in most running and swimming
events.
o There is a 20+ per cent Male performance advantage in most throwing and jumping
events.
o The Male performance advantage can be greater than 100 per cent in events that involve
explosive power, e.g. in collision, lifting and punching sports.
The quoted article seems to be specifically arguing against participation barriers in non elite sport..There is a social argument here for sure. Not one I agree with because what is sport if it is not fair.
Kids and Adults need those moments of success however meaningless to everyone else, it's why we do it it's why we train and chase PBs ar Park run or wear a 10k "marathon" medal in town when we're on the piss. Why would we reduce the opportunity for Girls to experience those moments..
Trans Females can participate in the open category within their own Phenotype..No problem.
