Negative Positive
Title: Quaaaaak
Review: If eating nutritional yeast supplements (dead) or yeasted bread (dead) could cause totally unrelated species of yeast (c albicans, living) to overbloom on your body, this would be a scientific watershed, and this finding would have appeared in a peer-reviewed scientific journal instead of a self-help book written at the third-grade level without citations, evidence, and plans for further research.This book encourages readers to think that they can control a virtually unlimited range of maladies by applying a one-size-fits-all quack cure. It thus discourages readers from getting safe and effective help from real healthcare professionals.I believe this shows an utter lack of ethics on the part of the author.Readers would be better served by reading a history of medical science (e.g.The Cambridge Illustrated History of Medicine) or an introduction to critical thinking (e.g.The Power of Critical Thinking: Effective Reasoning About Ordinary and Extraordinary Claims).
Is the review positive or negative? 