Better idea: get rid of the age requirement altogether.
If there had been the age requirement in 1976, the world would have been denied Nadia Comaneci. She was 14 in Montreal.
It wasn't needed then; it's not needed now.
I think what a lot of people don't know is that there wasn't always an age min.
An age restriction isn't even sufficient to prevent the advantages (e.g. more flexibility, lighter, etc.) they claim an athlete may have. I mean, if you really wanted to get rid of these factors, you'd have to separate the gymnasts into different weight/height classes. They do weight classes in wrestling and boxing to make it more fair. They don't do it by age.
So then you'd have to separate the short and the tall, the light and the heavier. Sounds like a bad idea.
If age were a serious factor, what is the point in separating a 14 y/o from a 15 y/o when you have bigger age differences such as between Shawn Johnson (16) and Alicia Sacramone (20). There was even a Russian gymnast competing for Germany who was 30+ and had a child already.
And what a lot of people don't know is that the official rules do not state you must be 16 by the games.
The official rules state you must turn 16 by the end of the calender year of the Olympics. That means if you turn 16 by December 31, 2008--and you are 15 y/o--you are eligible to compete in the Olympics.
In other words, 15 y/os are allowed to compete.