It's a bit of a leap to say they can use this to diagnose children.
They are comparing a select population to a broad control group.
The findings are interesting, and point to some good areas for further research, but it's very primitive still.
It is too early to make the kind of statements that the article seems to imply.
I like that the gender-holy-knights are getting bent out of shape over the implications that biology might have some connection to gender.
Imagine the day when you can administer a test and definitively differentiate between the transsexual, the transvestite, and the militant LGBT. Maybe people will have more sympathy for those with the actual gender dysphoria disorder instead of thinking of them as just another flavour of gay.
Schizophrenia also has structural differences to the extreme of effecting organs beyond the brain. Maybe more sympathy, but open tolerance of mental illness is too far. You can't pass off a sick or impaired state as healthy just to cater to the feelings of those suffering the effects of the disease. That would be like telling someone with cancer they aren't sick, their body just grows in a different way. Which is true, but that different way is not always benign and can be fatal. Basically you can scientifically legitimize that someone is biologically transgender but that doesn't make it a healthy state of being just because it is naturally occurring. End rant/
I don't think you needed to say that.
Isn't it a good thing to research shit that can help people with their problems? The only people this hurts are attention seekers and the permanently outraged.