I've been thinking about this since the original paper got released online. From my reading of the abstract, the paper set out to specfically compare outcomes of various assisted fertility procedures. IVF outcomes were not statistically different to 'natural' conception whereas there were higher risks in the other techniques compared. There was correction made for confounders relating to the parents' own medical history.
I'm also pregnant through IVF with a TTC journey full of more downs than ups, as is probably the case with many others.
I've accepted the fact that regardless of how I conceive, I face a higher risk of birth defects, miscarriage and host of other potential complications that face an older woman trying to conceive her first baby with the added history of a string of pregnancy losses.
To my mind, IVF is a facilitating procedure. It brings together egg and sperm that may have their own genetic defects as a function of the parents' age and medical histories. Is it IVF or the gametes that are most responsible for the eventual outcome?
Also, outside of a genetic disorder, a child's long term health outcome is combination of genetic and environmental factors.