In this article the author argues that the new "brain glitch" research is theoretically, empirically, and conceptually deficient. The author states that claims about the results of brain imaging studies constitute an ideological barrier to a sounder understanding of the connections between brain activity and learning to read. This work is a danger in the classroom both because it applies unproven labels to an ever-larger number of children and because it promotes a single kind of instruction that, based on the actual empirical evidence mustered for it, contains no promise for leaving no beginning reader behind. To help illustrate his critique, the author uses a recent and highly publicized study on reading and brain activity whose co-authors include Reid Lyon, Sally Shaywitz, and several other researchers whose work argues for building- blocks teaching and has been used as evidence for Reading First instruction. (Contains 29 endnotes.)