Not too long ago, I had someone say to me that they thought neurofeedback was snake oil. After I recovered from the shock of realizing that this person believed what they were saying and were bold enough to challenge me with it, I wondered how many other people secretly thought this, or perhaps hope neurofeedback is for real but fear that it is not.

Sadly, I think the tactics of some practitioners—who are usually well-intentioned—make it even more difficult to discern what is true and what is not about neurofeedback. There are neurofeedback practitioners who are straining to make neurofeedback into a form of medicine that can diagnose psychological and physical ailments. I have seen QEEG reports (a type of brain-map report) suggesting that it is X-percent likely that a person whose brain map was done has a learning disability or a traumatic brain injury, for example. In my view, that takes the world of neurofeedback way off solid ground. When people see or hear of reports like this, it’s no wonder they question the validity of neurofeedback. Yes, we can often see patterns in the brainwaves that point to problems, but at this time, neurofeedback is not a tool for diagnosing illnesses or disorders. It is a tool for training and reshaping energy patterns in the brain.

Then, there are the brain hackers and high-technology folks who are trying to devise portable devices that can serve as cheap break-throughs to the world of biological self-improvement. Some of these devices work and do what their makers say; many cannot. It’s easy to become jaded when viewing or hearing slick marketing campaigns full of fluff but utterly lacking in substance. The reality is that high-tech, portable devices are probably the direction in which the field of neurofeedback eventually will go. We’re not quite there yet, and potential users are wise to consider it to be a little like the Wild West—there’s gold out there, but it’s pretty hard to find. Regular neurofeedback has been around for decades and remains a much safer bet.

Neurofeedback absolutely has a scientific foundation. It emerged from a UCLA neuroscience lab in the late 1960s. Its practice is and has always been partially guided by what has emerged from research laboratories. This science disappoints some who expect huge, randomized, controlled studies, because it’s smaller in scope and budget than what those with deep pockets can fund. But, the research is there.

Even more progress in the field of neurofeedback comes from practitioners in regular office environments and not just university settings. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, a great number of breakthroughs were discovered by people whose clients guided them to new protocols and approaches. They work.

In the end, neurofeedback is biofeedback for the brain—a computer holding up a technological version of a mirror so that the brain has a sense of its activity and how to change. Biofeedback works. Neurofeedback works.

Does it work for everybody, in all circumstances, for all things? Of course, not. It’s not a magical panacea. It’s a learning tool. It’s way more powerful tool for brain change than the snake oil scoffers want to believe. I like to think of it as a powerful learning tool that involves both science and the art of competent practice. I have seen so many transformations, both big and small, that I trust the process.

If you’re interested in learning a bit more, give me a call or sign up for a consultation. You can see the equipment and how it works, meet me, and better decide whether to use neurofeedback to improve your life.