Now I know you’re either amn idiot or utterly dishonest.
The first article talked about transitory effects on the expression of genes, that is, their synthesis of proteins, based on RNA moieties temporarily changing the local conformation of a particular DNA segment.
Your article deboonks the strawman argument that RNA itself mixes with DNA permanently changing the sequence of codons.
OK, so they’re doctors talking down to the general public as they see it. But that’s no excuse.
Two utterly different things.
Sod off.
There is a saying : "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deep or taste not the Pierian spring."
The problem is people such as yourself who do not understand biology and are simply looking for confirmation bias. Have a nice day.