The book has weaknesses as well, unfortunately. The chapters are uneven and often repetitious. For example, although an entire chapter is devoted to the criticism of Project MATCH (a large-scale clinical trial financed by the National Institute on Alcohol and Alcohol Abuse), it is described and criticized in several other chapters as well. It also becomes clear, through this repetition, who the bad guy is, namely, the 12-step/disease model treatment. This treatment is repeatedly criticized as stigmatizing, rigid, and, in some places, ineffective, in contrast to harm reduction, which gets rave reviews. The characterization of the disease model is often simplistic and distorted. For example, in a table on page 116, Tucker and King characterize the 12-step/disease model as maintaining that "largely unalterable biological factors are the main controlling variables of addiction," in contrast to research that finds "changeable environmental contexts influence the initiation, maintenance and resolution of addictive behaviors." Another table, on page 350, contrasts physical disease and mental health paradigms, noting that the physical disease approach involves 1) treating biological causes 2) in inpatient medical settings, 3) after a brief history, physical examination, and detoxification, 4) at relatively high cost, and 5) with limited follow-up care. I do not believe that these characterizations accurately describe either current addiction treatment based on a biopsychosocial understanding of addictive behaviors or the mutual-help, 12-step philosophy. It is also rather surprising to read that the disease concept is stigmatizing, since one of its great advantages has always been relief from the stigma that conceptualizes addiction as a category of immorality.