Embryo screening for genetic changes causing severe rare diseases is justified because the presence of the genetic change is highly predictive of developing the disease and the disease would be severe. Polygenic risk assessments cannot make the same claim. They have much less predictive power and are not linked to severe outcomes. If anything I think the article makes polygenic embryo screening seem more reasonable that it is currently. On a purely practical basis the predictive value is very low. Even for more predictive traits like height it will never make more than the odd centimetre of difference to height. There are also wider ethical issues to consider as well ('designer babies' and embedding wealth inequalities in genetics) but currently these are somewhat less of a concern as the practical effects are so low.