A small study from NYU that sent focused sound waves into a deep part of the brain of people with schizophrenia has drawn wide headlines and, now, a pointed critique. On October 29, 2026, Peter Simons, writing for Mad in America, argued that the evidence behind the headlines is weak. He also flagged a company tie that the paper did not declare.1
The study has no proven treatment behind it. It is an early test of an idea, and the people who ran it say the brain circuit they targeted is still not well understood.1
What happened
The study was published in npj Acoustics, an online-only journal that started in February 2025. It focuses on the science of sound rather than medicine, according to the critique.1 Several outlets covered it. MedPage Today ran it under “Ultrasounds for Schizophrenia” in an October 21 roundup. Neuroscience News headlined it “Focused Ultrasound Calms Delusions in Schizophrenia.” LiveScience wrote that the method “may relieve delusions in schizophrenia, small trial hints.”1
The researchers used transcranial ultrasound stimulation. That means sound waves are sent through the skull, without surgery, and focused on a small target deep inside the brain.1 Their target was the globus pallidus interna, a deep brain area that is part of a larger network called the basal ganglia.1 The device was built by engineers at NYU’s Tech4Health Institute, and the team calls it the Sonicator-1000.1
What the study set out to test
The paper’s abstract opens by saying that “functional abnormalities of the globus pallidus interna (GPi) are linked to psychosis severity and treatment response in schizophrenia.” It adds that ultrasound stimulation aimed at this area “had not been examined” for psychosis.1 Psychosis is a state in which a person loses touch with reality, for example by hearing voices or holding fixed false beliefs called delusions.
So the study was a first look at whether nudging this brain area with sound might change psychosis symptoms. The sources Biohack reviewed do not report how many people took part, how they were compared, or the size of any change in symptoms. This article does not describe the results for that reason.
The critique
Simons raised several concerns. The first is the venue. He called it a “red flag” that a schizophrenia treatment study appeared in a new acoustics journal without an impact factor (a common measure of how often a journal is cited) rather than in a psychiatry journal.1
The second is the starting assumption. Simons argued that the abstract presents the link between the globus pallidus and psychosis as settled when it is not. In his reading, a couple of small earlier studies found only slight correlations between activity across the basal ganglia and psychosis severity or treatment response. One of those studies was led by the new paper’s first author. Simons argued that this is “a far cry from proving anything causal.”1
The researchers themselves sound cautious. The critique quotes the first author, psychiatrist Wei Qi, telling LiveScience:
The relationship between this circuit and schizophrenia symptoms is still somewhat unclear
Simons notes that Qi said this even after the new ultrasound study.1
Who is behind it
The study came from NYU Grossman School of Medicine and its Tech4Health Institute.1 Wei Qi was first author. The senior authors were psychiatrist Donald Goff and Shy Shoham, a population health researcher who directs Tech4Health. Michele Santacatterina, a population health researcher, and psychiatrist Gillian Capichioni also took part.1
Two Tech4Health engineers, Alon Gilad and Spencer Brinker, appear to have designed the ultrasound device, according to the critique.1 Simons reports that Brinker later founded CerebroBeam and is its CEO. CerebroBeam is a neurotechnology company working to develop and sell ultrasound technology for psychiatric disorders.1 The authors, including Brinker, “declare no competing interests” in the paper. Simons called this a second red flag.1 The sources reviewed do not include a response from the authors or the company on this point.
The sources do not say who funded the study.
How it fits the field
Using energy from outside the head to change brain activity is not new in schizophrenia research. In 2019, Yale University registered a study that used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in people with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who had auditory hallucinations, meaning they heard things that were not there.2 TMS uses magnetic pulses from a coil held against the head. The Yale team wanted to test the brain areas behind a lab task in which people report hearing tones that were never played. They hoped to check whether this explanation of hallucinations holds up.2 That study was stopped early. It enrolled one person.2
Focused ultrasound reaches deeper into the brain than surface methods, which is part of its appeal. It is already used in some brain treatments. At a neuromodulation meeting in January 2026, talks covered focused ultrasound for essential tremor, epilepsy, movement disorders and opening the blood-brain barrier to deliver drugs.3 Shayan Moosa of the University of Virginia summed up the trend. He said the field is moving “from lesion-based clinical applications for essential tremor and Parkinson’s disease into broader roles such as blood-brain barrier opening for drug delivery and reversible neuromodulation for neuropsychiatric disorders, epilepsy, and even spinal cord injury.”3 “Reversible neuromodulation” means temporarily changing brain activity without destroying tissue. That is the kind of use the NYU team is exploring.
What it does not show yet
- It does not show that ultrasound treats schizophrenia. It was described as a small trial, and even the researchers say the targeted circuit’s role is unclear.1
- It does not show what causes schizophrenia. Simons argues the study’s framing implies more certainty about the brain basis of psychosis than the evidence supports.1
- It does not address hearing voices directly. Coverage focused on delusions.1 Biohack’s sources did not include a registered trial of focused ultrasound aimed specifically at auditory hallucinations.
- It does not show long-term safety or benefit. None of the sources reviewed describe follow-up over time.
What to watch next
The next useful steps would be larger studies with a sham comparison, in which some people get a fake treatment that feels the same. Publication in psychiatry journals would also help, along with independent groups trying to repeat the results. Whether the authors correct their competing-interests statement, and how CerebroBeam develops the technology, are also worth following.1 Biohack will add to this thread if a trial of focused ultrasound for hearing voices is registered or reports results.
