A new study from the University of Houston is challenging the fundamental scientific premise behind electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), a psychiatric treatment used on an estimated 100,000 Americans annually. The research, scheduled for presentation at the IEEE EMC+SIPI 2026 Symposium, contradicts the long-standing claim that the scalp 'buffers' the brain from the electric current, a belief that has underpinned the safety of ECT for decades.
Psychiatrists have maintained that during ECT, the scalp harmlessly carries 90-95% of the electric current away from the brain, a concept known as the 'shunting theory.' However, the new study, which used a high-resolution three-dimensional digital model of the head to track the current's path, found the opposite: 82.5% of the total current flows through the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and brain, while only 1.5% flows through the scalp. The CSF acts as a major highway distributing current throughout the brain, according to researchers.
Kenneth Castleman, an expert involved in the study, noted that electrical energy converts into heat inside the brain, and higher current produces more heat, which can cause temporary injury, permanent damage, or even cell death. Additionally, electricity can create pores in cell membranes through a process called electroporation. When voltage is high, the holes overwhelm the brain's repair mechanisms, leading to toxic material flooding in and cell death. Thus, ECT poses risks of brain-cell damage from both heating and electroporation.
The findings have prompted the Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR) to renew its call for a ban on ECT devices. CCHR argues that the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 2018 decision to lower the risk classification of ECT devices must be overturned. Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. § 360f), the FDA has the authority to ban any device posing an 'unreasonable and substantial risk' of injury.
Professor John Read, a leading ECT researcher, draws parallels between the effects of ECT and closed-brain injury, noting documented changes in the brain after ECT are similar to traumatic brain injury. CCHR has documented cases of ECT being administered to teenagers and even children as young as five in some states.
Jan Eastgate, president of CCHR International, stated, 'Electroshock devices meet the FDA threshold, which need to be revisited. Decades of research document brain damage, memory loss, cognitive deficits, and mortality, while regulators have never required evidence of long-term safety or effectiveness.'
CCHR has a history of advocating for bans on ECT for minors, contributing to bans in California (1976) and Texas (1993). The World Health Organization declared in 2005 that there are no indications for ECT on minors and that it 'should be prohibited through legislation.' More recently, Western Australia banned ECT for under-14s in 2014, the Australian Capital Territory banned it for under-12s, and Ireland banned it for anyone 18 and under in May 2026.
Survivors of ECT describe severe side effects. Eastgate herself received ECT as a teenager after an undiagnosed underactive thyroid was mislabeled as depression. She woke up with searing head pain, failed to recognize her mother, and lost memories of friends and education. She called it 'like a grenade going off in her body.' Paris Jackson recently spoke about undergoing nine 'painful' ECT sessions in three weeks, experiencing severe head pain and amnesia. Utah Rep. Jake Sawyer, who received ECT in 2018, reported long-term damage and memory loss, saying, 'I've lost many, many, many years of memories.'
Eastgate concludes, 'Electroshocking individuals, especially after failed psychiatric drug treatments and institutionalization that deprives individuals of their autonomy, liberty and the right to an undamaged body and life, is an unnecessary practice that patients need to be protected from. All electroshock methods for all ages should be prohibited.'
