Miguel's Reviews > Breath: The New Science of a Lost Art

Indeed .. I also thought it was a bit to anecdotal but fun to read.. I would add that if you go Vegan in addition to re-learning how to breath and walk a couple of miles daily you may be onto the path of optimal health and a active old age;)

I had the same feeling: a lot of anecdotal evidence and unexplained magic, but suggestions to be more conscious about breathing did impact my fitness and axiety.

same feeling here.

Read this review before reading the book and in retrospect have a couple thoughts. I think the lack of the double blind studies was part of his main argument of: How is this function which is so essential to human sustenance not more researched? (Apart from respiratory maladies). Maybe these studies exist and the author doesn’t find them or they don’t support his argument but I tend to believe him that there are less resources focused here and that there is something glaring that western medicine is missing.

As far as a comparison to nutrition, maybe that’s an analog. But nutrition has numerous volumes of (as you reference competing) studies saying different things every year. The science seems to be less publicized on practicing breathing.

Either way interesting review/take. I found the book useful as a launching point to explore more. It got me curious to try out different techniques and there was good storytelling which, to your point, maybe makes it less of a science text and more compelling narrative and curation of breathing topics.

The author is pretty straightforward about the fact that there are simply not enough "deeply researched double-blind scientific studies" about the subject. So yes, he is telling stories about "pulmonauts" and their experiences, which are very interesting and though-provoking, though not always relatable and 100% convincing. BUT he's not claiming their methods are failsafe cure-for-all and he's open about their dangerous side. I expect 99,9% of the readers will just try to breathe through the nose slowly, not self-medicate with inhaling 30% carbon dioxide and going on a bike ride in Himalayas... or something. And if they do, maybe they should work on their reading comprehension.

Just my 2 cents worth of opinion based upon 81 years of breathing experience:

Allow your body to dictate the rate. My body says, "slowly" generally speaking.

Allow your body to dictate the depth. My body says, "shallow" generally speaking.

For what it's worth... What works for me or what works for the guru may not work for you. No 2 bodies are the same. One size does not fit all.

the rating is obviously manipulated here.
seems we Chinese are corrupting the whole world.
I'm very sorry for that.

Agree. Wondered why the holotrophic section was included in the book at all. I also rated 3 for similar reasons.

What stopped me was the part about each nostril having a different effect on *anything*. Sure, we have two nostrils and sets of sinuses and a brain with two hemispheres, but the nostrils and sinuses dump air into ONE trachea, so either nostril goes to the same place. It's just hard for me to get past that.

Started to feel like a bad novel at some points in the anecdotes

It says breathing differently could cure scoliosis. That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. That's a curvature of the spine and the only thing that can help is either a brace or surgery. A ton of quacks will say they can cure spine curvature (scoliosis), including chiropractors.
The nostril thing is also bull, though other people have pointed out why.
I can't see the rest of the book being much better. It's amazing what people will write that is a complete lie, hoping that people who are ignorant or deliberately ignoring science will buy it.

My favourite bit of this is the assertion that adhd can be cured by taping your mouth shut. The rest of the book is incredible, literally

100% with this review.

While I applaud this review for being neither totally praising or totally denigrating the book, it still doesn't acknowledge the author's care as was mentioned in a previous comment replying to this review. The author isn't asserting that this is science carved in stone. He's drawing attention toward an understudied and underfunded area of medicine and our understanding of our own physiology. Not to mention there are parties in several industries who are actively pushing to have this kind of research discredited, which I believe was also mentioned in the book, or may have been from my own research further into the subject.

Completely agree with your one star review!

Good book

Anyone who believes the author is making claims of breathing techniques curing anything is inaccurate. He makes it clear that breathwork can likely improve and prevent dis-ease but he blatantly states that it is not going to cure anything.

This is an odd review to me.
This book has the anecdotes of personal research and data taking, and it also has scientific studies, and anecdotes that - though not 'double blind studied' - are established practices today, with results you can see aplenty through Google.
Here I'm thinking specifically of Schroth's breathing exercises for improving scoliosis.
The scientists and doctors were horrified by her, later gave her an award, and now her method is standardized (with endless before and afters). Why doesn't it count unless someone with a million dollars thought it worthwhile to do a study proving it? Furthermore, what economic reason is there for someone to spend a million dollars on a study to prove a technique which can't be owned and profited from?

Not sure I want to finish this book- what are the authors credentials ? Studies of a handful of subjects are not something we should drop on the bandwagon - on the other hand I have an amazing yoga instructor who spends the first 10-15 mins of every 90 minute class having us work on breath- I think there is something to it but haven’t figured out what I need to do to improves- taping the lips shut at night seems a bit extreme and I would want scientific evidence in a randomized controlled study before I would endorse that to anyone- and certainly not children

Spot on. I would recommend the book for those interested in the subject. The science could use some more backing, but most (if not all) of it is in the region ‘no harm, no foul’.