I guess we have to review on FR every few hours the definition of a logical circle.
What you mean is that they had no greater incidence of other known (or admitted) disorders. You can't possibly STUDY a condition to decide if it is "normal" until you have created criteria for normalcy, which would necessarily have been developed OUTSIDE YOUR DISCIPLINE.
This has no bearing, logically, on whether or not the condition is itself a disorder, unless you have previously demonstrated that they come in clusters.
The "clinical criteria" of a mental disorder necessarily contain their own conclusions, since a mental disorder is not a physical lesion. It is a set of behaviors. The acceptability of these behaviors is determined by religious, cultural, and political discourse.
True, but have you looked at the clinical criteria of mental disorders? It's not that murky, illogical, or subjective. Yours is a phantom conundrum.