My point, this entire conversion, is the issue is complicated and needs more research. Yes some statistical differences in strength seem to remain. That doesn’t always translate to an advantage in a specific sport though. As I’ve mentioned before, and your own post references too, bone density doesn’t change. Moving around heavier bones with less muscles is a factor in determining any specific sport advantage.
You also ignore this entire section directly after the part you mention:
relative percentage lean mass and fat mass (and muscle strength corrected for lean mass), hemoglobin, and VO2 peak corrected for weight was no different to cisgender women. After 2 years of GAHT, no advantage was observed for physical performance measured by running time or in trans women. By 4 years, there was no advantage in sit-ups.
Surely there’s more to it than just strength right?
Again, my entire point is the issue is hard to study and needs more research. Surely you can see the value in using non-athletic populations in studies in order to get a sample size, even though its not perfect, right?
You are the one saying the issue is a 100% decided scientific fact. You have a greater burden of proof associated with that claim, which you have not demonstrated. Until you do I’m done with this convention.
My point, this entire conversion, is the issue is complicated and needs more research. Yes some statistical differences in strength seem to remain. That doesn’t always translate to an advantage in a specific sport though. As I’ve mentioned before, and your own post references too, bone density doesn’t change. Moving around heavier bones with less muscles is a factor in determining any specific sport advantage.
You also ignore this entire section directly after the part you mention:
Surely there’s more to it than just strength right?
Again, my entire point is the issue is hard to study and needs more research. Surely you can see the value in using non-athletic populations in studies in order to get a sample size, even though its not perfect, right?
You are the one saying the issue is a 100% decided scientific fact. You have a greater burden of proof associated with that claim, which you have not demonstrated. Until you do I’m done with this convention.