New research from the University of Houston is challenging the fundamental scientific premise that has underpinned the psychiatric use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for decades. The findings, which contradict the long-held claim that the scalp safely absorbs the majority of the electric current, are now being cited by mental health watchdog groups as further evidence that the procedure should be banned.
For years, psychiatrists have maintained that the 0.9 amps of electric current used in ECT is largely "buffered" by the scalp, with 90–95% of the current harmlessly diverted away from the brain. However, a forthcoming study presented at the IEEE EMC+SIPI 2026 Symposium analyzed a high-resolution 3D digital model of the head to track the path of the current during ECT. The results show 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 the study.
The study's findings have significant implications. Experts note 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 the voltage is high enough, these holes overwhelm the brain's repair mechanisms, allowing toxic material to flood in and causing cell death. Thus, ECT poses risks of brain-cell damage from both heating and electroporation.
Professor John Read, a leading ECT researcher, draws a parallel between the effects of ECT and closed-brain injury. "The effects on the brain [of] ECT is very similar to the effects of what's called a closed-brain injury… there's changes in the brain that are documented after ECT, very similar to traumatic brain injury," he said in a statement.
The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), an international mental health watchdog, has long demanded a ban on ECT and is now calling on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to overturn its 2018 decision to lower the risk classification of ECT devices. 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.
According to CCHR, an estimated 100,000 Americans undergo ECT annually, and the procedure is still administered to teenagers, with some states allowing it for children as young as five. CCHR has documented cases of minors being subjected to ECT despite global recommendations against it. The World Health Organization declared in 2005 that there are no indications for ECT on minors and that it "should be prohibited through legislation." Several jurisdictions have enacted bans: Western Australia banned it for under-14s in 2014, the Australian Capital Territory for under-12s, and Ireland for anyone 18 and under in May 2026.
Survivors of ECT describe lasting harm. Jan Eastgate, president of CCHR International, received ECT as a teenager after an undiagnosed underactive thyroid was mislabeled as depression. She awoke to searing head pain, failed to recognize her mother, and later could not remember friends or parts of her education. She calls it a barbarity "like a grenade going off in her body." Proper treatment for her thyroid ended her symptoms, but recovery of the memory lost to shock took years.
Paris Jackson also spoke out about undergoing nine "painful" ECT sessions in three weeks, experiencing severe head pain and amnesia. Despite photographic evidence, she had no memory of visits or conversations with friends. She recalled her doctor telling her, "It's not as barbaric as it used to be. They use general anesthetic. You're knocked out when they shock you."
Utah Rep. Jake Sawyer, who received ECT in 2018 after being told it was safe, suffered long-term damage and memory loss. "My vocabulary is nowhere near what it used to be, and making new memories is vastly more difficult than it was before," he said. "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."
