This is such an odd preoccupation of places like the guardian and has a lot of the hallmarks of the discredited recovered memory movement/therapy[1][2]. There's never any discussion of epigentic changes that effect somatic cells vs gametes, or even of the competing definitions of epigenetic changes.
Here's a quote from the article:
> Scientists working in the emerging field of epigenetics have discovered the mechanism that allows lived experience and acquired knowledge to be passed on within one generation
This is obviously such a nonsense interpretation of epigenetic changes that it's hard to take anything in the article seriously.
Obviously there's real science happening around epigenetics and there are interesting findings, reporting like this is a really big leap.
Here's a quote from the article:
> Scientists working in the emerging field of epigenetics have discovered the mechanism that allows lived experience and acquired knowledge to be passed on within one generation
This is obviously such a nonsense interpretation of epigenetic changes that it's hard to take anything in the article seriously.
Obviously there's real science happening around epigenetics and there are interesting findings, reporting like this is a really big leap.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered-memory_therapy
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/27/opinion/recovered-memory-...