A forthcoming University of Houston study challenges the foundational electrical theory that psychiatrists have used for decades to claim electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is safe. The research, which analyzed a high-resolution 3D digital model of the head, found that 82.5% of the electric current flows through the cerebrospinal fluid and brain, with only 1.5% through the scalp. This directly contradicts the long-held 'shunting theory' that the scalp harmlessly diverts 90-95% of the current away from the brain.
The findings have serious implications for the estimated 100,000 Americans who undergo ECT each year. According to experts involved in the study, the electrical energy converts into heat inside the brain, and higher currents produce more heat, which can cause temporary injury, permanent damage, or cell death. Additionally, electricity can create pores in cell membranes through electroporation, overwhelming the brain's repair mechanisms and leading to cell death. These mechanisms suggest that ECT poses significant risks of brain damage, memory loss, and cognitive deficits.
Professor John Read, a leading ECT researcher, draws a parallel between the effects of ECT and closed-brain injury, noting documented changes in the brain similar to traumatic brain injury. This aligns with decades of research and survivor testimonies that highlight the devastating consequences of the procedure.
The Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR) has long advocated for a ban on ECT and now points to the FDA's authority under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to ban devices posing an 'unreasonable and substantial risk.' CCHR urges the FDA to overturn its 2018 decision to lower the risk classification of ECT devices and to require evidence of long-term safety and effectiveness, which has never been provided.
CCHR has helped secure bans on ECT for minors in California and Texas, and international bodies like the World Health Organization have declared that ECT should be prohibited for children. Recent legislative actions in Australia and Ireland have also restricted or banned the procedure for young people. However, in the U.S., ECT is still administered to teenagers and, in some states, children as young as five.
Survivors like Paris Jackson and Utah Rep. Jake Sawyer have shared their harrowing experiences of memory loss and cognitive impairment following ECT. Jackson described nine 'painful' sessions that left her with severe head pain and amnesia, while Sawyer reported losing years of memories and struggling with vocabulary and new memory formation. These accounts underscore the urgent need for regulatory action.
Jan Eastgate, president of CCHR International, who herself received ECT as a teenager after an undiagnosed thyroid condition was mislabeled as depression, calls the practice 'barbaric' and emphasizes that all electroshock methods should be prohibited for all ages. She notes that proper medical treatment resolved her symptoms, but recovery of lost memories took years.
As the scientific consensus shifts and survivor voices grow louder, the pressure on regulators to re-examine ECT's safety profile intensifies. The University of Houston study adds to a mounting body of evidence that the procedure's risks far outweigh any purported benefits, and the call for a ban is becoming impossible to ignore.
