The Truth About Brainwaves, Mystic Monks, and Authenticity in Science

The brainwaves of seasoned Tibetan Monks are a curious thing. Curious for many reasons, scientific, cultural, economic, and more; they have formed a captivating area of interest for both mystics and scientists. Reflecting upon the science, how it is communicated, and how it is received by society produces many interesting observations about how we work as a species, as a culture, as an economy, and how they are all intertwined. The history of how these Tibetan monks began to be studied is a fascinating tale of humankind, encompassing many elements of our modern society.

Measuring Monks’ Brainwaves

In the early twenty-first century, a study was done in 2004 by a team of scientists led by Dr. Antoine Lutz and Dr. Richard Davidson. Particularly for Dr. Davidson, it was his interest in meditation and bringing Eastern spirituality to scientific study that created landmark progress in bringing these ideas to bear in the twenty-first century.

In many ways, the early twenty-first century saw the broader culture of Western science opening up to accept numerous new discoveries previously deemed odd. Rather than eccentric notions, topics like extra-terrestrial life began to be debated and studied rather than eschewed and laughed at. Eastern spirituality, especially meditation, became a topic of science and understanding as opposed to being scoffed at as a failed leftover from the psychedelic era.

In the early 2000s, scientists like Dr. Davidson began dialogues with the Dalai Lama. Cooperating in bringing mutual understanding, the two sides paved the way for Electroencephalography (EEG) — a recording method of the brain’s electrical activities — to be done on monks who were long-time practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism. The proposed study was controversial, the methods were untested. The people involved were wary, provoked by their perception of mystical nonsense encroaching upon their domain. The stuffier side of scientific culture was not quite ready to entertain these ideas.

Regardless of the methods and commentary, the results created quite a stir. When the monks entered a meditative state, their brain state measurably changed. It was clear that something significant was happening which had never been seen before. Compared to before meditation, during meditation the monks exhibited high-amplitude gamma brainwave activities in the frontal parts of their brains. This was sensationally puzzling; these sorts of brainwaves were poorly understood since gamma waves could not be measured accurately at the time with lack of equipment and methodologies. What was known was that gamma waves are relatively fast and are associated with more active states of mind, sensory integration, and many other forms of brain activity. Puzzling then, the presence of high-amplitude gamma waves for these monks who appeared to be fastened into a state of deep peace. There are many elements which have brought meditation into the light as a rich topic of scientific study, but this study, culturally, made huge strides.

Modern Measurements and Methods

Today, this 2004 study of Tibetan meditators remains one of the most cited papers in the entire field of meditation science. It helped usher in an era where today hundreds of styles and thousands of practitioners, from those who have never meditated to those who have decades of experience, have undergone scientific studies. Surely, then, almost two decades later, with thousands of studies done, the brain activity results in the famous 2004 paper would have been reviewed and reanalyzed, especially since this study remains one of the most cited meditation papers ever written? Fascinatingly, no. The results of the study have never been replicated in any proper study. The Tibetan monks were studied by many, yet no one has seen that particular activity in the brain as a result of meditation. EEG, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), controlled-studies, peer-reviewed papers, have all been brought to bear on elucidating how meditation and mindfulness practices change our brains for better or worse and in the short- and long-term. Many studies followed over the next decades, yet the sensational results from the paper that started it all have never been seen in any properly controlled study since.

What does that mean and why does this happen? Conspiracy-theorists may be thinking there is a bit of charlatanism going on: an easy bit of sensationalism in a nascent field pushed forward to advance the careers and public notoriety of those responsible. However, the true story is different, more subtle, and perhaps only recognizable to those who have inhabited the field of neuroscience for some time.

It is all a matter of methodology. EEG, the method used to measure the monks’ brain activities, is very susceptible to surrounding noises such as cardiac signals, muscle and eye activities, and movement artifacts. Thus, one of the biggest challenges in the field is to verify and replicate EEG studies.

Many EEG studies have unique research pipelines to process the data. These pipelines depend on the year the study was conducted, the equipment used, and the experience of the involved scientists. Older devices and older methodologies often failed to measure the brain activities reliably. Some common errors were the computer signals transmitting the data not being fast enough to keep up with the brainwaves; the electrodes not being sensitive enough to capture certain brain activities; or tiny facial, eye, or body movements which can occlude and heavily distort the signal. To this day, many pieces of EEG equipment are still hamstrung by these issues, particularly in the emerging market of consumer level EEG sensors where careful analysis pipelines have to be developed in order to ensure veracity of the data. The high variation and extreme sensitivity of these devices creates ambiguity and can be tough to manage and interpret.

In this context, the 2004 study was not dishonest or poorly done, in fact, those involved are at the top of their field. However, despite the acumen involved, it is still a product of its time. The particular gamma activity in meditation has indeed been seen across imaging studies in a variety of fields, it just was not coming from the brain.

Today, the field of EEG is increasingly understanding the effect of facial artifacts in EEG. It is well-studied and seen how certain facial expressions or eye movement/fixation creates high-amplitude gamma activity. We understand now that the face and eyes, with their respective nerves and muscles, produce electrical oscillations that are larger than that of the brain and get in the way of the signal. It is a pretty easy scenario to visualize and understand once you know the noise source. The noninvasive EEG electrodes are placed on the forehead and scalp to record the brain’s subtle electrical activities. Between the brain and the electrodes, however, there are layers of bone, tissue, muscle, blood vessels, and so on, in addition to the influence of eye movement, which create electrical noises in EEG signals. Most of these artifacts overlap with the frequency range of EEG, most commonly in the delta and gamma frequencies. Thus, they might be included in the analysis accidentally, which would heavily distort the results. These days, there are many filtering methods one can employ to eliminate these artifacts from the neural signal data.

With these factors considered in the case of meditation, the faces a person does or does not make during meditation can influence the results. In the 2004 study, the thought at the time was that these sorts of artifacts only existed above 45Hz or so, when today we can readily demonstrate they start around 18Hz and are localized to particular regions. Fortunately, this makes them easy to spot once you know what they look like. See the graph below demonstrating some of my own analysis on a highly experienced mediator in the depths of their practice. The clear frontal activity beginning around 18 Hz was found to be generated from a fixation of ocular activity — a rigidly still gaze with eyes closed. Other factors sometimes seen in meditation, like blinks, twitches, or a subtle smile can also impact the brain frequency spectrum in various ways, most often at the higher frequencies in these cases.

Unfortunately in 2004, neuroscience had yet to fully understand these factors or even develop the methods to properly isolate, understand, and remove them, EEG methodologies still being a shifting framework. In the modern era, to address the proliferation of erroneous, unique, or non-replicable results, Harvard has created the HAPPE pipeline which seeks to create a standardized process for EEG analysis. The works of those like Arnoud Delorme at IONS have also been forward-thinking and productive in the field of EEG analysis through the program EEGLAB, the most popular EEG analysis software used. Still, various methodologies and levels of understanding are constantly at play in this field, demanding further efforts toward standardization.

Asked Again, Answered Again, but Differently?

So, we have a fascinating question we can ask from this position. If the 2004 study is dated beyond use, and modern methods have much improved EEG analysis and interpretation, what then to make of the question regarding the brainwaves of Tibetan monks? Has anyone in recent years studied them in their deep states of meditation? Excitingly, the answer is yes in some form of cruel irony or poetic expression of the universe: the new results are almost the exact opposite of what was previously found!

In 2020, a study looking at the brain and heart interactions of Tibetan monks in deep meditation, the same study subject as the 2004 study, was completed and published by a collection of scientists from well-respected labs across both the United States and China. They evaluated the brainwave alterations seen in deep meditations performed by these monks. Their results indicated a significant deactivation of brainwaves, particularly strong deactivation in the theta and gamma bands. They show that there is a coupling between these two bands and one’s lessening activity is related to the other’s. Again, the study’s results are very different from what was previously found. The 2004 study found huge increases in fronto-parietal gamma, while the 2020 study found huge gamma decreases in these brain regions and increases only in occipital (rear) regions, similar to other studies, most likely resulting from visualization activity of the monks. The authors report:

“Specifically, we have demonstrated that the immediate effects of meditation in skilled meditation practitioners include transient changes in the neural activity of the ACC [anterior cingulate cortex] in response to heartbeats and decreased frontal-limbic network connectivity in the gamma band . . . the attuned frontal-limbic network connectivity in the gamma band potentially indicates the meta-awareness/consciousness state hypothesized to be involved in meditation. Moreover, monks exhibited unique, strong gamma to theta directional coupling during meditation, which, based on the significant evidence implicating theta–gamma coupling’s importance in attentional tasks we believe to be directly related to the monks’ attentional focus and processing.”

This section of the study discusses the unique co-down-regulation of theta and gamma brainwaves in experienced mediators in key frontal-parietal regions and demonstrates how the degree/duration of meditation is related to the theta/gamma levels in the monks’ brains at baseline. Simply, the more meditation experience a person has, the lower the gamma waves are in the fronto-parietal area of the brain, even when they are not meditating, at least in the context of this Tibetan practice. This demonstrates how meditation has a deep impact on the brain’s processing, both when meditating, and after, as a result of a sustained meditation practice. The recent results are fascinating, yet substantially different compared to the sensational 2004 study which created the stir.

Seeking Support

Astute and scientific-minded folks likely have a great question in their heads at this point. If the first sensational study’s results have been found to be erroneous, we logically cannot cite another singular study in order to refute it. The methodology of the 2020 study is superior to the previous 2004 study, the analytical pipeline much more developed and wise, yet the logic remains true that it is still a singular study. However, fortunately, many other studies have been put forward in this field which have got similar results, demonstrating the profound alteration in brain waves in meditation, particularly those around the down-regulation of frontal-lobe theta and gamma.

A very interesting study we can point to is the work of Dr. Schoenburg, and others, in collaboration with Dan Brown, a famous student and teacher of non-dual awareness meditation practices, which are highly similar to those practices of Tibetan Buddhism. This study also found tremendous decreases, most deep in the gamma range, in brainwaves when an experienced meditator engages in their practice, echoing what was described above in both my own analysis and in the 2020 monk study. They found a large gamma crash at the onset of a meditative state followed by subtle alterations over the course of a single practice.

Must Be Funny

So, after all of this study, understanding, and development, why is that 2004 study still the most cited? The answer, like many things that persist in modern society, is hugely impacted by money. As a society, our economy, habits, and health create opportunities for businesses to seek to instigate, identify, or otherwise capitalize on trending needs and desires. Where science is concerned with the veracity of an idea, concept, or methodology, business only requires that customers believe a claim in order to succeed and make money. In the realm of opportunity, the desire to have a “monk brain” is wildly attractive to a population increasingly stricken with stress, anxiety, mental health issues and an increasing distrust in what is considered mainstream medicine. This creates a huge opportunity for those to advertise to this population and capitalize on the market trends. A vulnerable population, particularly those in mental and physical pain, are easy targets for “get-well-quick” schemes promising ultimate serenity in exchange for the purchase of a device, course, or method.

With cherry-picked and misinterpreted data, the “get zen quick” gimmick takes advantage of and manipulates people with little care for their mental health. Many are attracted by the prospect of supplanting years of meditative practice in favor of supplements, devices, and methods to get them there fast: to become a mystic Tibetan monk faster than actual Tibetan monks. In the last decade and half, roughly, this market of spiritual wellness has become a multi-billion dollar industry.

Meditation is a wonderful technique for mental wellness, and has been seen to be impactful on the brain in many ways. However, real progress in meditation takes time and work, it’s challenging and powerful stuff. You can find many sincere teachers and practitioners out there willing to take folks on that journey, the path of introspection and reflection. However, the quick and easy options often get the most attention. Why watch a video discussing our inherent biases, or one that takes a look at how to cultivate awareness over time when we could easily click into a spurious “healing frequency” video which promises to insert powerful monk brain waves into your brain in a matter of minutes? Why take time to hone and adapt your nervous system when you could buy a device that is claimed to do the same? For those in need or pain, the quicker and easier option is highly marketed and often taken. We are all guilty of it somewhere in our lives, and often, the backlash from being duped leaves us worse off than when we started out: our problems remain and our wallets become lighter.

The sensational aspect of the gamma-monk study in 2004 became a cornerstone of this sort of charlatanism. It captured people’s attention, made headlines, and ushered in a perspective through which to mislead and capitalize. Today, despite the understanding by scientists about gamma waves being down-regulated in key brain areas in deep meditation states, workshops using gamma entrainment promising to give the equivalent of 10,000 hours of experience in monk-like meditating in the space of a weekend are still booking tickets. Devices, hijacking medical device labels like “TMS” (transcranial magnetic stimulation) are still being sold, creating buzz citing that 2004 study, promising people transcendent states and training, despite scientific studies which point to their lack of efficacy.

Often, these devices and methods coast through on a specific FDA loophole. Devices intended to improve mental health, and physical health, are required by the FDA to go through testing. Often, the first route is safety testing, followed by clinical testing evaluating the impact of the treatment/device. However, if you label yourself as a “wellness” device, this allows you to skip the tests, make all claims you want as long as you word everything in a specific fashion to avoid invoking FDA requirements. The only necessary thing is FTC clearance to show you are not building something which blatantly harms the user. With that done, you can promise your customers what you want and create the ideal marketing scheme to present your device/method as the remedy for their particular needs.

Science, Industry, and Society — How to Stay Sustainable

This calls into question the need for authenticity in science, society, and industry. As a neuroscientist and consultant in this space, it is my experience that this field demands a lot of humility, open-mindedness, and space for constant change. Neuroscience is entering into a golden era, and rapid changes are to be expected. In my own consulting practice, this is something I make a point to impart to my clients, especially those in the neurotechnology or wellness field. There is so much buzz, marketing, and ideas being thrown around that it can be hard to parse and separate the innovative from the misleading. I have been asked a few times why medicine does not, or is cautious, in up-taking the latest technological innovations, and this is a core reason why. What matters is what is real, not what sounds best. Therefore, if a company wants to build something authentic and sustainable, it begs some understanding of this industry and its history.

History Repeats Itself

This industry of effortless and mystical mind expansion in exchange for cash is not old and did not start with the gamma sensationalism of the early twenty-first century. Before the gamma results were hijacked and slapped onto the proverbial lunchbox, theta and alpha brain waves were often the focus of misleading advertisements. It is easy to find examples of companies in the past that have the same marketing as today’s money-funnels, just with gamma swapped out for theta or alpha.

For example, folks might remember the Zygon company who developed weird meditation machines, learning enhancements, and so on in decades past. One device they made, called Supermind, claims to adjust brain waves toward alpha/theta levels, which allows “a 20 minute session” to be equivalent to a “8-hour sleep and helps reset” the user’s “biological clock” . You can search the FTC claim files and find Zygon in there. They became overzealous in their claims, attracted critical attention, suffered lawsuits, and had to adjust themselves due to their fraudulent advertising.

Brain training programs, too, are often devoid of scientific basis, yet millions engage in them in the hopes of improving themselves in one way or another. Those who watched TV or frequented the internet about 10–15 years ago undoubtedly have seen the advertisements for Lumosity, a brain training company offering little games to improve aspects like memory, satisfaction, attention, and so on. They too suffered FTC take downs and millions in fines for their fraudulent and pseudo-scientific advertising. Now, we know there is no real benefit to brain training in this way, it being a topic that has been very well studied. Check out this article by Cambridge Brain Sciences on the topic, for those interested.

In our modern era, many fields and techniques suffer from the tarnish of the groups making a quick buck, even if they are honest themselves. For example, neurofeedback therapy is an increasingly popular choice for working with brain health. As a technique, there is some good science behind it, but the techniques are often too poorly understood and implemented resulting in drawing a lot of critique. Many studies which review various neurofeedback devices and techniques conclude that they do not work. For example, take this article. Technically, correct, yet damning for neurofeedback practitioners, which, in my opinion, is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There is something to neurofeedback, when it is done with respect to the individual and dynamic nuance of the brain, particularly respecting the uniqueness between every person’s brain. Yet, the biggest names in the field are often the most misleading, leading the public to increasingly distrust the technique. So, when companies like those mentioned in the article get out there with their sensational and attractive claims, they make money off of those in need while damning their peers in the space which are doing right by the science.

Real Change Takes Work

Overall, there’s no shortcut to peace, enlightenment, joy, or anything else we desire so fervently. It takes time and effort and always has. Companies are quick to market themselves as the latest in technology that allows people to get well, “become supernatural”, gain peace, insight, and so on using misleading science and age old marketing techniques. The examples to draw upon are endless and it begs exhaustion to list or discuss them in any more detail. In 1990, Barry Beyerstein, wrote an article that sounds like it was released just yesterday in the International Journal of Mental Health entitled, “Brainscams: Neuromythologies of the Modern Age”. I think the first sentences in the piece sum it up nicely:

“Glib, painless routes to insight and mastery are perennial best-sellers. Mountebanks are sure to flourish wherever credible authorities decline to produce the impossible and the hopeful are willing to substitute cash for time and effort.” Dr. Barry Beyerstein

Self help takes time, always has, and always will. The Simpsons had it right, in a wonderful early episode satirizing the manipulative aspects of the wellness industry.

A Continuing Journey

The future is bright, technology and understanding is expanding in new and unexpected ways, just watch out for those that seek to take advantage of it. Scientific understanding moves, expands, and grows over time, challenging anyone who plants their seeds in singular papers or ideas. Just in the past months, another hugely advertised piece of neuroscience, one that I personally used and one also highly cited in the consumer sector, was recently overturned, which was the idea that after 4–8 weeks of mindfulness meditation, the brain experiences increases in cortical thickness. The authors of that paper, led by Dr. Richard Davidson, repeated their study with modern instruments and methodologies and found that their original claim was not true, the study suffering from the substantial issues in neuroscience imaging research. Commenting on the new revelation in an article in The Scientist, Dr. Davidson comments:

“There was frankly a lot of hype . . . saying that if you meditated for eight weeks you could change the volume of your prefrontal cortex. That is false . . . [I hope this forms a] useful corrective in the field and helps to tone down some of the hype that has been associated with these kinds of practices. We’re big fans of meditation, but we’re big fans of truth, too.” Dr. Richard Davidson

So, does that mean that meditation is bunk? Absolutely not. It just shows how limited our understanding is and throws a curious eye over to the folks that cite cortical thickening as a core of their product’s functioning, similar to the folks citing results from the 2004 monk study. There are plenty of honest, legitimate, and passionate folks out there who are advancing the field, teaching meditation, staying humble, and respecting science. However, it is up to us as consumers to take the time to understand if something is misleading. Often, sensational lies speak louder than humble truths.

Overall, my recommendations? If you are an entrepreneur, think carefully, speak to scientists, and build something authentic that will stand the test of time. If you are an individual in need of help, consider if something sounds too good to be true before you plunk down cash and, even more precious, your time and attention. If you are a scientist, clearly communicate the limits and methods of real science, avoid the easy temptation and short-term fame offered by sensationalism. The scams will never go away, they will just change shape, as they always have. Stay vigilant, and be patient, true innovations are arriving that will change the way we look at the world, our brains, and so much more. However, real change, the kind that matters, comes from within, originates within a person, not a pill, device, or shortcut, and always will.

Written by Jordan Kiefer O’Sullivan, edited by Han Cat Nguyen.

Jordan Kiefer O’Sullivan is a scientist, consultant, and co-founder at coscientists.com, specializing in writing, consulting, and development of projects in biomedical science, health and wellness, and neurotechnology.

Han Cat Nguyen is a neurotech enthusiast and a PhD student at McGill University. Her passion is brain-computer interface, especially brain-controlled robot.