That depends on what you call transhumanistic. It's certainly not Nick Bostrom transhumanistic. I completely avoid that concept as radical. We are unavoidably in a time of change that we must adapt to, but survival is the ultimate conservativism and change is dangerous. The idea is to adapt both genetically and strategically to a new ecology that replaces the hunter gatherer ecology. (An ecological analysis nicely defines the domain.) Some people seem to consider any genetic adaptation to be transhumanist. I only talk about reducing the frequency of broken genes and increasing the frequency of existing genes, not producing new genes. Humans currently have all the genetic potentials we need to make it to the next stable ecology. We don't need new genes yet and there is inherent risk to producing new genes that I leave to people wiser than us, that have had time in the new ecology to really examine the issue. We are babes, just out of the woods. Change is dangerous. The minimum adaptation we need to survive is safest, especially since it is a larger change in ecology than any species has ever survived. When we reach the safety of a new ecology, we can think longer term.
If you are talking about genetics, that is covered pretty much completely in "Genetics For A new Human Ecology". There's an old version on Youtube.
As for strategy, I rarely see any consideration of needing new strategies, I never see any specific strategies offered and I never see the consideration of strategies in the context of biological potentials. Everyone seems to love machines as solutions... and I admit, it's a difficult problem that took me 50 years to solve... if I have. As such, I don't think anyone has called the strategic considerations I work on transhumanist. As far as I know, where I work is in terra incognito . It's not that trick... once you figure it out.
I feel I should apologize. For all my volumes of writing at http://zagwap.com/Bio/index.html, I don't think I ever wrote that part down... (though I have published the basis of it somewhere on Medium). I have moved on to defining the strategy we need. Parts of it do already exist in philosophy, such as "balance" or "know thyself - vocation, avocation, etc." but a lot of it is novel, derived from the biology. That webpage is my work area, but as a writer you know how many times you have to start over each time you make progress. Write, emergence, abandon hard work, write, emergence, abandon hard work, ad infinitum. I'm hoping my current work is the final start over. I'm sick of this but the idea is good and there is reason to think I've gotten to the end of it.
Uhhhh.... is that transhumanist?
