Moreover, there is the temptation to conclude that epigenetics explains “everything,” whatever that might be; most effects of childhood experience on adult outcomes probably don’t involve epigenetics and (stay tuned) most epigenetic changes are transient. Particularly strong criticisms come from molecular geneticists rather than behavioral scientists (who generally embrace the topic); some of the negativity from the former, I suspect, is fueled by the indignity of having to incorporate the likes of rat mothers licking their pups into their beautiful world of gene regulation.
As a molecular geneticist, I would be party to the "particualrly strong criticisms" mentioned, but not for the reason he gives. In fact, I doubt most molecular biologists have any problem to that so-called indignity. Rather, my problem would be the one he mentions a couple paragraphs further, which I note below.
