I first read this book in 1985, I was amazed at the ease of reading and the simplicity of the information. I have personally bought hundreds of copies and given them to all kinds and ages of people. The contents of the book, even though a bit scattered, give everyone hope, and ideas that are simple to incorporate into their lives. Therapeutic touch is so underrated in our society and this book gives people permission and insight to touch in healthy ways. I have noticed the book is out of print and am disappointed that I do not have access to it any longer. I hope if it is being edited that it will be bigger and better. I now teach at a Massage school and use it as a required text to open students minds to touch and the different ways we as humans touch each other. I recommend the book to anyone who appreciates touch as energy and it's impact on our lives.

To show the background by characters,I can hardly say that it did a nice job.The same thing, I think Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre did much better than that. If the he think using that way make some real-life style. I could just say it is nasty and unbelievable but not real-life.

This book has some good pointers and provides good strategies for giving your opponents the biggest rhetorical butt-kicking of their life, but their methodology is far too rigid. "Be gracious to your opponent" they say and "Make concessions." I have always been a fan of agressive arguing and find the arguing style the professors who wrote this book to be a little too passive. But I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy using this book for class. It may have proposed an largely ineffective way to write persuasive essays, but it was at least very informative about what it had to say. Most of the essays they include as examples of argument stlyes are very well written. While I reccommend this book for your writing classes, I must warn you not to take the text of this book as rigid dogma meant to define how all papers should be written. Go with what your gut feeling tells you, and you will shine.

This textbook was our "required text" during first year medical school. I always assumed that bribery of some sort resulted in this situation, as I cannot find any redeeming qualities of this book except that it makes an excellent doorstop. Why is this book a waste of your time? Under the assumption that you are a medical student, let me tell you: it's way too detailed for any medical student to dream of ever learning during first year physiology. Let's face it- we have a lot to learn in an extremely short amount of time, and the time must be rationed wisely. Most students will never have the time or patience to sit and spend hours reading about the mathematics of diffusion (example). Some great, useful physiology textbooks are "Principles of Physiology" by Berne and Levy (the thinner paperback) and Guyton & Hall as a reference book. Don't waste your time with the Johnson.

While not the avid "reviewer" type, I thought it necessary to warn others about this text. Purchasing this book as an "optional" text for my undergraduate physiology course, I expected that it would provide clear explanations of the processes being covered in lectures. I was first disappointed in flipping through to discover that the book only includes a few diagrams all of which are entirely composed of blue and or black ink. Then, hoping to find clear explanations inside the small type, journal style, marginless and endless paragraphs, I was again disappointed.

Halfway through my full year course I am searching for more options as this book fails to help me in those desperate moments when lecture notes just don't seem to make sense. This book goes into lengthy detail with mediocre summaries, such that the reader gets lost in details (and the neverending sentences) long before any understanding of the topic occurs. The lack of diagrams leaves no other option other than finding another source.

Any students out there?? Find another book! Any GOOD text will get you through, with all the essential information you need for both personal interest and for exams.

Most students will find that learning physiology from a textbook can be quite a chore. Pure physiology books are usually so packed full of tiny text and incomprehensible diagrams that most people will be either beside themselves with panic or comatose after just a few pages. The authors of Essential Medical Physiology seem to have realised these facts and have produced a book which differs significantly from others in the field. The text is marginally larger than in comparable books and the chapters are thoroughly indexed and summarised. In short, the authors seem to be refreshingly in tune with the medical student's needs. Explanations are written in an almost informal manner and reach the level of complexity exactly appropriate for a medical degree. Processes students traditionally struggle with (such as the countercurrent exchange system in the nephron) are presented clearly and lucidly with extremely accessible accompanying diagrams that take you through the arguments step-by-step. Essential Medical Physiology also tackles any feelings of apathy towards the preclinical teaching by continually supplying the reader with 'Clinical Notes' which flag-up the importance of understanding the physiological mechanisms to the practise of clinical medicine. The figures are extremely clear and lucid throughout, despite being presenting in a two-tone blue and black format. Diagrams of this quality, however, require a large amount of space and areas slightly off the beaten track of core medical physiology have been cut to a minimum. The reader will find explanations of intracellular processes, such as protein synthesis, extremely brief - but it is not a medical physiology book that one would immediately turn to for this information. In summary, when lost in the jungle that is preclinical physiology, it is depressingly often that the book you turn to for guidance is not only ignorant of the direction you should take but doesn't even seem to speak your language. Essential Medical Physiology will not only point you in the right direction, it will draw you a map and advise you on the best guest houses for when you get out. It is a refreshingly clear book in both text and diagrams.

Regardless of the author's bias, the book is just dreadful. Of all the books on this subject, there must be one clearer than this. Just terrible.

This book supposedly examines different political ideologies, but all it does is slam on the right. Meanwhile, the left is somehow sacred, and avoids criticism. I wonder if the writers have been up in the ivory towers too long, because the real world is not reflected in the writing of this book! Unbalanced, and not worth reading.

After reviewing a number of textbooks on American ideologies, I found the Hoover textbook to be exceedingly fair in its presentation of all contemporary American ideologies. It approaches the topic historically and is quite accurate; I found no bias in favor of any particular ideology. It not only covers all the bases, the structure is sensible and very helpful for students, who think they know what "liberalism" and "conservatism" mean, when in fact they do not. It's not my dream textbook, but I highly recommend it.

I bought this book with the hope of reading how top contemporary Protestant scholars address the issue of ecclesiology espoused by Rome and the Orthodox. It left me sadly disappointed. The chapter that addresses the four marks of the church defined in the nicene creed did not attempt to reconcile Protestant perceptions of those terms with the historical understanding of the council fathers. None dealt substantially with Eph 5:32. I was further saddened that one author criticized the piety of Catholics on the basis of his understanding rather than taking the time to just ask some of them why they were doing it. All guns trained against Catholicism while the Eastern Orthodox hold nearly identical views on ecclesiology. Perhaps someday a book with less rhetoric and polemic will attempt to address issues that build understanding rather than polarizing divisiveness.

"The most common liquid is water, which we use for generating hydroelectric power and white-water rafting." p308 Vol 1 Oh, is that all? If you are intent on learning physics, do not buy this book. The explanations leave much to be desired, the organization is poor and the problems at the end of the chapter seem to expect the reader to know more than the book cares to teach. If you have a committed teacher, this book can be wonderful, but otherwise, try something else.

I'm a computer engineering student and have been studying this book for 3 months and I've concluded that it's impossble to learn from. In almost all of the examples, the author skip steps that are vital for students who have never analyzed circuits in such detail before. The reading is difficult to understand, even after reading each chapter two or three times. It's as if the authors wrote this text to impress their colleages. I'm fortunate that my professor explains the material faily well. I'm definitely going to sell this book back at the end of the semister and use the money to invest in a useful circuits text. I highly recommend you do not buy this book, I wish I never did.

Take my suggestion: "Don't ever buy this book". I am a second year student and my school use this book as a text for Introduction to EE. Since my instructor is so bad in explanation, at the very beginning, I thought, I could rely on this text for understanding. I HAVE READ EVERY SINGLE WORD IN THE FIRST TWO CHAPTERS AND REPEATED SO MANY TIMES AND STILL, I DON'T COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THINGS. Very vey hard to follow. If you don't believe what I said, read it yourself before buying it.

This book is extremly difficult to learn from. The material that is covered is not explained very well for someone just starting out. There may be one of two reasons for this, either the authors know the subject matter so well they lost touch with the basics or they more or less wrote the book to impress their peers.

This book is so full of mistakes (as well as being poorly written and designed) it would be funny if I hadn't had to pay for it. Probably rushed out to take advantage of the Beatles' "new" success because of the "1" CD, this is one you should avoid.

I ran accross this book at a local book store and bought it for a Christmas gift. Being a first generation Beatles fan, I think I know a fair amount about the Fab Four. I found this book to be full of errors. A photo of Paul McCartney with Jane Asher is identified as Paul and Linda. Another picture is labeled as being of John and Yoko. Even a non-fan would be able to see that the people in the photograph are clearly NOT John and Yoko.

DON'T BUY THIS BOOK!