There's nothing wrong with this book, per se. But it could have been so much better and more useful. I don't sense that's the author's fault, but poor guidance on the part of the editor/publisher, whose job is to guide scientists away from being too opaque for the general reading populace.
Shors is a neuroscientist and does a good job presenting, if dryly, the mechanisms of the brain's response to trauma. She explains, from a neuroscientific perspective — that is, in terms of neurobiology and, to a lesser extent, neurochemistry — how the brain processes the experience of events into memory creation and onward to feelings and emotions. She prepares the reader with a solid baseline in the nature and types of "everyday" trauma, and how stress and trauma impact us.
All of this is logical and clear, if dry and formatted in such a way as to lead one with little-to-no post-high school scientific knowledge to their eyes glazing over. A neuroscientist should know that at least some of her readers would benefit from graphics to explain more complex issues, to understand how neurons and the hippocampus and whatnot work in anatomical and chemical context.
So, it's accurate, if painfully dry. Shors employs almost no humor, and for most of the book goes back to the same well of limited examples, like the different experiences of two people in the same car accident. The tone and pace do not lend themselves to being accessible to the layman who lacks sufficient grounding in the biological sciences. Again, there's nothing wrong with this, unless you're struggling with maintaining attention and interest; I suspect many readers have walked away without getting to the useful part of the book.
Shors also spends a good central chunk of the book talking about the role of rumination in the experience of ongoing anxiety due to trauma. This is an important topic, and one that could have been vastly improved by colorful anecdotes about real people's lives; instead, it was repetitive, discussed far more at the biological level than the psychosocial level, and made me feel that Shors' editor should have paired her with a writer with a lighter, more deft touch at human connection.
Some people have complained that the main focus of the book is women's experiences of trauma. While more of her research includes women, that makes sense given that until recently, almost all of the research on PTSD in both academic and popular literature has focused on the male experience of trauma. This is righting the boat, leveling the field, or whatever. Everyday trauma is experienced by both men and women, but in different ways. The study of men's experience of both battlefield trauma and everyday trauma is different, as she explains, and women are far more likely to seek help and to volunteer to participate in research.
So, could the book's title have referenced that there's a greater focus on women? Sure. But since NONE OF THE OTHER BOOKS focusing mostly on male trauma bother to mention that, I'm OK with Shors' focus on her research in women. Dudes, it doesn't always have to be about you. ;-) Plus, the practical applications of her research are not gender-specific.
The main concern I have with the book is that the title and subtitle, Everyday Trauma: Remapping the Brain's Response to Stress, Anxiety, and Painful Memories for a Better Life leads the reader to expect that this is a book about the actionable way to improve one's life and recover from trauma.
The book itself (not counting the scientific/academic citations) is only 164 pages. The precursor material about the neuroscience and (to a lesser extent) psychology of trauma takes up 110 pages. Then there's a (frankly quite useful) recap of available therapies for stress and trauma, up through page 126.
Shors does not begin to discuss her actual, actionable approach to remapping the brain's response until page 138, and continues only until page 144. Merely seven entire pages of the book tell you what to do., and there's a couple dozen closing pages of anecdotes!
Basically, the reason most people would grab this book is a block of text equivalent to a longish blog post, and the entire thing can be summarized as: meditate on your breathing for 20 minutes, medicate on your steps for 10 minutes, and then get vigorous aerobic exercise for 30 minutes, all without breaks in between, and do it a few times a week. Someone else added spoiler warnings for a similar sentence; I'm not going to do this.
There's nothing wrong with any of this, but it's disappointing. I suspect those who most need the advice would struggle with paying attention to the 130 or so pages until the advice arrives, and then so little context and troubleshooting supports the advice (for people who have difficulty with, or are unable to participate in either the meditative or physical aspects), such that I imagine readers deflating. The book one expects from the marketing (and even the subtitle) would have minimized the dry, if accurate, textbook-like preceding pages and would have augmented the actionable material with more guidance for applying it. I would have enjoyed that book.
Technically, the writing is without flaw. There's nothing outside of the realm of science that is hard to understand, and if one is able to understand the science, that aspect is likely interesting to the layman. I have no doubt that Shors is a talented neuroscientist and researcher. I'd like to note that she ended the book with a short anecdote about the application of the method during the early parts of the COVID pandemic. Expanding the book to include more of that would have been a great idea. The non-scientists (and non-science-oriented) among us might have found the book more compelling and both intellectually and emotionally accessible.