Fifth-grade prose, disjointed, and incoherent. Logorrheic -- and I mean literally, in the clinical sense; not as a metaphor. The book reads like a random agglomeration of bits and scraps of material "borrowed" from other books that the author (1) neither quite understood himself, nor (2) succeeded in quoting with preservation of meaning (perhaps unsurprisingly because of the first). Borderline ungrammatical: it's obvious that writing isn't this person's strong point, although uncharacteristically for this sort of self-published material, the book appears carefully proofread, and the errors are mostly at the usage, rather than basic grammar level (except for punctuation, I must say, especially with commas and semicolons, who are mostly lacking, but sometimes are found where they don't belong). Shaky diction, lack of coherence -- this sort of thing... well, I'm beginning to repeat myself: the book is amateurish in the bad sense of the word; exactly what is usually expected from a self-published volume.
Now onto the contents: first, who is the author to give advice? What's his claim to fame, as it were? (This is not captious criticism: he gives advice on hormones and what not.) The bio blurb at the end of the book says he's a "provider of fitness information" in Las Vegas somewhere. What the hell is that, "provider of fitness information"? Suppose I flatulate a bunch of disconnected nonsense vaguely themed as nuclear science, would I qualify as a "provider of nuclear-science information"? I was unable to discover what the author's credentials are. When it comes to nutrition, hormones, etc., I like to see in the author's bio words like "medicine", "clinical research", "PhD", "laboratory" -- this sort of thing. None of it here. What can be discerned of his background (as given in this book) is that he took a college course in "religious studies" (anyone's guess what that might involve, and whether he graduated), that was then followed by a string of sales jobs. Then he decided to "follow his bliss" and started to dispense advice on hormones; go figure.
But fine, still let's look at what he says. There's quite a bit of gibberish in this book, but even those parts that aren't altogether semantically void, look like a random jumble of bits and scraps the author borrowed from other sources. In a sense it's like a drunken peasant talking philosophy to his equally inebriated buddies after serving food at his aristocratic master's soiree where philosophical matters were discussed by cultured sophisticates in powdered wigs. One thing he makes abundantly clear: he has no clue of what he's talking about and has no business dispensing advice of this sort. The bio blurb suggests -- how truthfully? -- that (among other things) he's a columnist to a number of muscleman mags. This is absurd, and if true, tells you all you need to know about those publications. Bibliography reveals sources of deep wisdom like pop twaddle from Gladwell and Napoleon Hill; deep philosophical remarks are based on action movies like Star Trek, Unforgiven, and Gattaca. I was waiting for profound exegesis of "V for Vengeance", which to his credit, never happened (although, based on the rest, it might have been for lack of space rather than perceived unsuitability). Anyway, you get the point.
According to the author, to a large degree his book consists of his blog entries already published online (he even states, most mysteriously, that recycling blog drivel in book form is the best way to write a book! What does that mean? Why does one need to write a book to begin with? I mean, if one's got nothing to say to the point of having to recycle one's blog entries). I wasn't familiar with the author, or his blog, and I didn't check it out prior to acquiring this book, but if you, Dear Reader, are interested, I suggest you google your way to this blog and see how you like it, 'cause that's what the book is by the most part. Had I visited this blog -- and assuming it truly is representative of the book -- I would have saved myself from giving a short-term microloan to Amazon.
Also notice a bunch of positive reviews: I have no doubt whatsoever that they have been posted by the author's flunkeys or maybe even himself (Amazon makes this possible, isn't it nice?).¹
Now, all of this invites a question: why did I get a self-published book, by an otherwise unknown author, in the "advice" genre (always a big red flag in itself, even if published by a major publisher and from a known writer), a book that sports a bunch of fake-looking positive reviews? The reason is Amazon's liberal return policy: every once in a while I like to venture into an unknown area, as long as the risks aren't big (with Amazon, none) -- just to avoid going stale as it were: sometimes you do bump into something worthwhile, in some way at least; for example, last year I bought a paperback by Charlie Bronson The Most Horrible Prisoner in the UK: it was rubbish as expected, but the rubbish was entertaining; in addition it gave me some pointers to follow up on. This is the kind of thing I'm looking for when I buy suspicious stuff: unexpected value, even if hidden in a pile of manure -- this doesn't happen often, but it does happen. It didn't this time: this laughable book goes back. Without a shade of hesitation: not recommended.
1. One of the most obvious, dead giveaways of fake reviewing is a large number of positive reviews by reviewers with only one review in their review collection -- the one for that book (click on "See all my reviews" to verify if that is the case for a reviewer you're curious about). It is especially suspicious if the reviewer in question is a non-real-name one (in that case, it is possible that it's one and the same guy buying _something_ on this site, using this purchase to set up yet another non-real-name posting account, and posting yet another review for the same book -- like I said, it is mind-blowing that Amazon allows this, but they do, just try yourself if you got a few minutes to spare; even an author or seller can do that, and they do do that quite a lot on this site).
Another thing to consider is, how when a self-published book by an unknown author -- the one that is, objectively, quite weak -- suddenly accumulates a large number of reviews to begin with. How come it's so popular immediately upon release? One must suspect this inexplicable sudden flood of amazingly positive critique comes from "friends and family", not bona-fide, unaffiliated readers. Long story short: (1) beware of manipulation and (2) read critically and learn from what you observe.