User Profile

I've read some absolutely incredible reviews about this book. So incredible, in fact, that I literally find them incredible. I will give this a good chance. The only part I'm not sure of is that it offers a lot of stories and anecdotes. I think this is science based, so that's not too uncommon for a book like this

A little more investigation turned up this review, which to me rings pretty true, and helpfully points out some Anti-Vaxx sentiment in Chapter 8:

"As a PhD neuroscience student, this book on neuroplasticity in humans was intriguing for a lot of reasons, and the rave reviews led me to buy it with no feelings of doubt or regret.

The principles discussed regarding neuroplasticity seem scientifically sound enough and are based on early evidence mostly from animal models of neuroplasticity (not discussed in this book) and work presumably discussed in his first book. The book was written really well in a narrative sense, sparking thought-provoking ideas and allowing anyone at any level to comprehend complex neuroscientific ideas in a consumable way. I was intrigued and open to the idea that, when applied in an intentional and specific way, energy and thought-based interventions can allow the brain to heal itself.

My discomfort came from the over-reliance of anecdote and case study, and lack of reports from clinical trials and/or meta-analyses on the techniques discussed. The author states in his afterword that anecdotes and case studies are important to scientific/medical study, which they absolutely are, especially towards understanding medical phenomena and sparking further investigation. With a quick primary literature search, however, you can find that many of the results discussed in this book regarding the efficacy of neuroplastic techniques are exaggerated, much less conclusive in the conducted clinical trials, and borderline controversial. The author makes an argument that clinical trials have high generalizability but low individual power, thus making the case for the necessity of case studies. This is true, however to dismiss the rigour of clinical trials and omit actual data from the book (which would have weakened many of the arguments made) is scientifically irresponsible. This was exacerbated by a very late attempt to make a case (or suggest) that vaccines cause autism (Chapter 8), which has time and time again been refuted by a significant body of empirical evidence, but was simply dismissed by statements that the two anecdotes discussed in the book revealed a correlation between vaccine administration and the development of autism in infants.

In a book that is ironically written in a style that aims to convey hope for those with brain/body disorders, Doidge’s doom-and-gloom view of modern day western medicine and exaggerated praise for energy-based interventions left me as the reader more concerned about how scientific thought and findings are communicated. Though Doidge’s ideas and theories concerning neuroplasticity are promising and based in science, his narrative style of explaining complex scientific topics simultaneously oversimplify and overstate neurological mechanisms to fit his narrative. Thus, this book can both be inspiring and dangerous, and those reading should take a word of caution before proceeding."