I agree with the practical conclusions on the author, but it drove me crazy how the author switched back and forth between good science and pseudoscience or even parapsychology. We know, for example, that epigenetic trauma transmission can potentially pass really specific trauma responses to further generations and this has profound implications. But for some reason he'll cite a real study showing this in mice one minute, only to turn around and give Rupert Sheldrake's morphic resonance theory, widely considered pseudoscience and unnecessary to explain trauma transmission given what we now know about epigenetics, the same level of credence. Then he might throw in the implication that the ghosts of our ancestors are also hanging around so we can help them work through their traumas, just for good measure. 

Thankfully, his conclusions about things like how we do therapy still turn out to be solid. I just don't think we can afford to promote scientific illiteracy on this day and age.