A study has been making the rounds and has been published in BJSM. It is a meta-analysis of various research, providing strong scientific evidence focused specifically on sports. I don't think it will change much; just like a single study or court case won't eliminate transgender people or stop transphobia.

It’s clear that trans women who have been on hormones for 1 to 3 years, especially longer, do not have a significant advantage on average. At the highest, most elite Olympic or professional levels it may still make a difference. That is not what most everyday sporting discussions are about.

Some people think males are naturally better at checkers and chess than females. This view parallels those who believe trans women become women in the same way as XX females. They are thinking at a metaphysical level of difference.

I read the study and also ran it by both Grok and ChatGPT 5.2 deep research, then gave each model the other’s output. They both concur.

ChatGPT analysis link

BJSM 2026 meta-analysis (52 studies, n=6485):

After 1–3 years of GAHT, transgender women show no statistically significant differences from cis women in relative fat mass, relative lean mass, handgrip strength, jump height, or VO₂max. Absolute lean mass remains higher, but functional impact is unclear.

Caveats:

Evidence is mostly low or very low certainty due to heterogeneity, observational designs, weak confounder control, short follow-up, and reliance on non-sport-specific tests (mainly handgrip). Elite athlete data are sparse.

Bottom line:

The data do not demonstrate a clear retained performance advantage, but they also do not prove equivalence. The study weakens claims of inherent, GAHT-resistant advantage without settling sport-policy questions. Nuanced, sport-specific rules remain scientifically justified.

At the same time, acting as if years and years of hormone use make no difference at all just isn’t supported by data.

Jazz Jennings circa 2015 Jazz Jennings circa 2015. In the 1990s and earlier, a boy who was girly would be told to play with the girls—and it wasn’t a compliment. Now if you say “sure, I will,” people get angry.

What would be data-driven at this point is to have policies that look at cases individually. If someone is like Kim Petras or Jazz Jennings and wants to run a marathon, forcing them to compete as a man would be absurd. At the same time, someone who came out six months ago competing as a woman in a high-level, money- or scholarship-based competition is also absurd.

The hardest cases are at the high school level, when someone might reasonably begin hormones. A person who had a full, unmodified puberty and transitioned late is a different case from someone who has been under medical care since freshman year and is now a junior or senior, where the physiological effects of estrogen can be profound.

People also forget how much natural variation exists among adolescents of the same age. The athlete shown below is not consistently taller or stronger than her peers and does not always place first.

Not always, but often, these controversies are mixed with racial bias. Many viewers assume a Black girl is trans in similar cases, echoing past accusations directed at Venus Williams or Michelle Obama.

Original BJSM article