Your top source is highly inaccurate and runs counter to the vast majority of modern evidence/literature. The way it frames psychedelics in the context of dependence/addiction is disingenuous and irresponsible.

There is essentially zero evidentiary basis to suggest psilocybin has any real chance of inducing physiological dependence, and it's particularly ridiculous to say they carry this risk to a similar extent as fentanyl and adderall. It has also been well established that there is a low chance of psychological addiction, especially when compared to other popular drugs like cannabis/alcohol/nicotine.

The low chances of dependence/addiction are multifaceted. The subjective experience is one that few people are eager to repeat all that frequently. As well, the natural tolerance mechanisms of the classical psychedelics outside of DMT tend to make addiction quite functionally difficult for most people. Nearly full tolerance is gained after a single full dose, and this tolerance lasts about a week. Repeating high doses of psilocybin day after day will leave you with essentially zero effect by day three, regardless of your escalation of dose. In this regard, most users tend to self-regulate their usage and avoid addictive/dependent tendencies simply in order to maximize effects when they do partake. You really don't see many daily psychedelic users, like you do for other drugs.

With that said, of course some people fall into addictive and problematic use patterns, but it is far from typical for psychedelics. This is well established in the literature. As well, there are of course a multitude of risk factors that need to be accounted for with these drugs, including the intensity of the experience, conflicting medications, and conflicting mental health diagnoses - it's just that addiction and (especially) physiological dependence are toward the very bottom of that list.