First if you think my reply which merely pointed out that your remarks were meaningless or that you were unqualified (as you yourself pointed out) was "Abusive". You ought to re-read the article which is an open political attack, along with a photoshopped image mocking a researcher.
""" So when you say it would be major progress if this discovery led to the development of a drug that helped 20% of sufferers, I say sure, but wouldn't it be more revolutionary if we could understand precisely why these genetic predispositions express in some people and not in others, then use this knowledge to develop techniques to resolve or prevent the illness in 100% of people? """
The issue with such statements/questions E.g. "But wouldn't it be great if we could prevent cancer instead of curing it?" or "But it will be more awesome if achieve true AI instead of just some game benchmark" or "Wouldn't it be great if achieved faster than light space travel". Is that at best they are meaningless from point of view of scientific inquiry. They offer no benchmark, or even a reasonable plan of action. At worst they are often used to mislead from real scientific achievements.
Such statements are feel good equivalent of "World Peace!" or "End Hunger!" or "All you need is loveee!". While most users on this site would be able to quickly figure out the futility of "World Peace now" they don't recognize it when the similar statements are formulated in medical / healthcare domain.
To conclude this, what the researchers found regarding schizophrenia is awesome, they published in Nature, and as other comment points out most of the scientific community thinks its amazing if not revolutionary. There is no reason to dismiss it by quoting a politically motivated attack by some blogger and citing impossible to achieve goals without any feasible roadmap.