People accusing this book of being shallow and/or cultural appropriation are...wow.
First, it's an IDIOT'S GUIDE. You expect a deep and detailed analysis in something that has the word 'idiot' in the title? Someone here's an idiot, that's for sure. She's making a basic beginner introduction to Ayurveda and she delivers just that.
As for the cultural appropriation, ooooooooo wow now who hasn't done their research? If you accuse HER of cultural appropriation for creating a book on Ayurveda for Western audiences, are you also going to accuse Communist China for the same, since TCM borrows heavily from ayurvedic principles? Are you going to say TCM is awful because IT, also, adapts and changes and cherrypicks parts of Ayurveda for its own climate and populace?
Here's the deal: Ayurveda proposes that you can improve your life through various rituals of self care, including dinacharya (daily connections) like tongue scraping, body oiling, diet, etc. She has the clearest analysis of the doshas in the basic Ayurveda books I've come across. And yes, she suggests you can pick or choose and add just a few things into your life, rather than diving headfirst into living in India (which would TRULY be cultural appropriation).
There's no harm in this. The way I see it, people can start a few ayurvedic practices and it becomes a gateway for them doing more research and getting more knowledge (beyond an *idiot's guide*) and deepening and enriching their lives, health and practice. How can you hate on that?
OR, they can try a few things and keep those and never go any further, but now their eating less meat or they've got a meditation practice or they make better and greener dietary choices and that's it. I see...no harm in that, either. If they do small things that have a net positive on their lives and the world, and don't go full ashram...they're STILL bringing more good into their lives and the world. Only fundamentalist JERKS would have a problem with that.