[1] Reviewers point out the episodes tend to give more weight to enthusiastic testimonials than to expert advice, painting a positive picture of treatments that are often ineffective or dangerous.
However, the series suffers from false balance, drowning the advice of experts in lengthy testimonies by sympathetic practitioners of alternative medicine and their clients.
At CNN, Brian Lowry points to the interviews with scientists and journalists sprinkled through the episodes as an explanation of how people can be manipulated by those who seek to sell treatments "more rooted in faith than science".
[7] Jonathan Jarry of the Office for Science and Society says the series "observes but never judges, and this impartial approach causes it to commit the sin of false balance."
"[8] Writing for The Daily Beast, Laura Bradley worried that despite using interviews with genuine experts, the series risks promoting the conspiracy theorists and health gurus it also presents: "As much as (Un)Well clearly wants to serve as an even-handed guide into the strange world of wellness, the show's insistence on letting each side speak for itself without tipping its hand means all it's really doing is providing a platform for quackery and false hope."