Scan barcode
lucas_delap's review against another edition
4.0
You can tell this book is written by a journalist: it’s full of anecdotes, simplistic explanations lacking nuance, and one sided points.However, these faults do give rise to some of its strengths. The book is easy to read, doesn’t bore the average reader with complex science and excessive detail, and is very enjoyable. For these reasons this book is not a scientific dive into breathing but more an intro to it - a layman’s guide to it. A good way to get people to think about a poorly neglected aspect of health.
jenmangler's review against another edition
3.0
The first part of the book was interesting, and if I'd stopped reading there I would have really liked it. I had lots of issues with the last 1/2 or so of the book, though. It's more anecdotal than I would have liked.
kitkat962's review against another edition
2.0
I'm halfway through the book when my library loan ended, and I didn't think of extending it. The book is not compelling enough for me to finish. I would list the book as "could have been a long blog post". There is a central idea, but it meanders with anecdotes, personal experimenting, and vague references. This is the problem with a lot of popular science books these days, the science is watered down to "Researchers unknown at prestigious US universities said", without footnotes or follow-up references. There will be scientists (current and future) in the audience, and therefore, popular science should be treated as a critical literature review at least.
Conclusion: breathing properly is good
Conclusion: breathing properly is good
carolzreadz's review against another edition
4.0
Is it science or hippy stuff, honestly I look like both anyway :)