http://saveyourself.ca/articles/book-reviews/trigger-point-therapy-workbook.php
Am I the only one who finds this review by Paul Ingram of the Trigger Point Therapy Workbook to be a bit off target?
Basically he can't actually find specific reasons to discredit the book so all he can do is bash the begining and end, which most people will ignore anyway, while alluding generally to Davies making far-fetched claims.
But what gets me is his idea that a self-help book should be "extremely detailed" so that you turn out an expert on the subject. That's not the point. People don't want to make a scientific study of it..they just want to know how to self-treat.
He also states that some people can't get help with their very difficult cases. Aspirin doesn't always work for very difficult headaches. But when it does work, the relief is real.
He calls Davies a Zealot. While I can understand why someone would think Davies a zealot I don't think it is fair to call a man you have never met, and presumably only know threw this book, a zealot. One of the defining charateristics of a zealot is that they are uncompromising. You have to give a man the chance to compromise before you can say that about him. And since he is no longer with us we don't know.
If he is a zealot that does not make the actual info less credible. Zealots are not cranks. You judge the info not the attitude.
Paul Ingram cannot actually say that large majority of the book isn't right and yet says it is "not credible" What he is saying is that Davies is not credible. Since the majority of the book simply takes Travell and Simons and makes is usable, then they also, must not be credible.
This is so related to the "perfectionistic syndrome" I was alluding to in my bad fitness article posts. The harder you try to make something aimed at a general audience perfect, the less useful you make it.


