Anyone found Silman's books (excluding endgame) detrimental to their chess?

Dvoretsky's and Shereshevsky's books are certainly worth , not only reading , but carefully studying again and again.

I have read both the 3d edition (1993), which i checked out of the Dade County library, and the 4th ed. (2010), which I bought new. 

The fourth edition is totally re-written.  It's like a whole different book.  Silman kept his main theory of "imbalances," but even totally changed his recommended thinking process for candidate moves and choosing a side of the board to play on.  Every chapter is written from scratch, and many of the example games are post-1993, with even some "yahoo chess" games thrown in there for some reason.

So, that's the scoop on the fourth ed.  I'm interested in hearing how the first and second editions differ from the third edition.  Did Silman re-write his book four times? 

I have a friend that owns the first edition of "Reassess" but I haven't seen it yet.

I found his books were not at all detrimental to my chess improvement. In fact, I read both his reasses (3rd edition) and amateur's mind and my rating skyrocketed from ~1050 to 1700 in the matter of 10 months. Mind you as well, I had stagnated around 1050 for about 5 years. 

*Those are OTB USCF ratings, not internet

Reassess your Chess Workbook is a pretty handy study tool for analyzing positions, but i do not always agree with his explanations and find them rather confusing.
"Silman's Complete Endgame Course" is another awesome tool that has actually helped me a lot....
As for "The Complete Book of Chess Strategy" (and the introduction to the workbook) i found my chess in a slump as well after reading carefully.... I simply do not like (or agree) with his system of thinking, it clouds my own creativity which is why i choose to stay away from his books now....

Futhermore I find his articles (and chess mentor problems) difficult to read... reasons for that i can't explain