In the commentary, the subsequent discussion is about who defines well-being and how. Whilst this in itself is an interesting question that deserves careful consideration from many perspectives, it is not directly relevant to the target article. The article raises the question of whether epigenetic proaction is possible, and presents scientific data and theories to explain what this means. On that basis, I suggest that they can be taken to support the view that it may indeed be possible. The questions of defining well-being or of specifying who should be in charge of defining well-being, whilst interesting, fall out of this scope.
In contrast, the question of "side-effects" can with some effort be considered at least somewhat relevant to the article under debate. Here, Schleim wonders: is it possible, e.g., to reduce aggression without making a person weak or meek? Can a less aggressive person defend him- or herself against a more aggressive person? He seems to be doubtful, but my short reply is: obviously, yes. Much education, of children in particular and in human societies in general, includes attempts to check aggression—it does not thereby create either wimps or zombies. Even martial arts focus explicitly on checking aggression, whilst by definition aiming to make students excellent in combat. Schleim also wonders about the risky side-effects of increasing sympathy. He warns that increasing sympathy too much could perhaps lead to a "dysfunctional self–other distinction" that "may play a role in schizophrenia". However, even if this were the case, this is not a necessary—or even very common—side-effect of increasing sympathy. Certainly, when we bring our children up to sympathise with others, we may increase their distress at the sight of suffering in others, but I do not believe that we thereby increase their risk of developing schizophrenia. Moreover, as a general principle, that an initially positive value can become negative if exaggerated does not entail that we should stop seeking it altogether. If that were the case, we would have little to strive for.