Okay, this is not a new thing. People were transitioning as early as the 1930s using pretty much the same methods as today. It's only becoming a more visible issue now. Frankly, the only thing I see going forward that would be different would be more availability for people to delay puberty for a couple of years and begin cross-sex hormone therapy at around 15ish, which makes the whole competition aspect waaaay less of an issue. And I don't know about other countries, but the NCAA here in the states has had a similar policy in place for some time too. One thing you should consider is that this only makes headlines when someone wins or does well, you never hear about a trans woman that's only okay for comparison. I would like to see the IOC/NCAA release an actual report, but that's out of my hands. Also, why wouldn't the policy be able to be changed if it showed itself to be a major problem later? It's been 12 years, 6 events if you count Summer and Winter Olympics with the wide variety of sports covered by them. Once again, if it is such an obvious unfair advantage, why hasn't some country like North Korea taken advantage?

And your final thing is solved by the way, both organization's policies state that hormone levels need to be within normal female ranges for a specified period of time. No one is fighting that either...other than people who are still arguing against inclusion in general of course. And let's be honest, even if there were easily-available 100% airtight undeniable proof that there was no advantage some people would still be against it because they just don't like trans people.