For the past two decades, biohackers and cognitive enhancement enthusiasts have been adding frequencies to their brains. Binaural beats, isochronic tones, audiovisual entrainment—all promise to guide your brain into optimal states through carefully crafted auditory or visual stimulation. The premise is simple: expose your brain to the right frequency, and it will follow along, entraining to states of deep relaxation, laser focus, or creative flow.
But what if we've been thinking about this backwards? What if instead of adding more signal, the answer is compensating for the noise that's already there?
Most discussions of brainwave entrainment focus on additive approaches: introducing new frequencies to shift your brain into desired states. This assumes the problem is insufficient stimulation. But emerging research suggests a different issue entirely: your brain is already operating in an electromagnetically polluted environment. Power line noise at 50 and 60 Hz sits right in the middle of the spectrum of brain activity and is routinely picked up by EEG sensors. [7] The constant hum of the power grid creates baseline interference that disrupts natural neural rhythms. [8]
Physical removal of this interference isn't practical—you'd need mu-metal shielding or a Faraday cage, technologies that isolate you from the modern world. But there's another option: compensatory entrainment, which uses active cancellation principles to neutralize interference effects without requiring you to live in an isolation chamber.
In this article, we'll explore two fundamentally different philosophies of brain optimization:
- Additive Entrainment: Adding new frequencies to push your brain into different states
- Compensatory Entrainment: Adding counter-signals to neutralize ambient EMF interference
We'll examine the science behind each approach, review the research on efficacy, and help you understand when each method makes sense. This isn't about declaring one approach "better"—it's about understanding what problem each solves, so you can make informed decisions about your cognitive optimization toolkit.
Key Question: The question isn't whether to add frequency—it's whether to add a new stimulus or an inverted signal to cancel existing interference.
What Is Brainwave Entrainment?
The Basic Concept
Brainwave entrainment is the practice of using external rhythmic stimuli to synchronize brain wave frequencies to a desired state. The underlying mechanism is the frequency following response (FFR)—the brain's tendency to align its electrical activity with rhythmic external input. [5, 6]
Think of it like a metronome for your neurons. When exposed to a steady 10Hz pulse, groups of neurons begin firing in sync with that rhythm. This isn't mysticism—it's measurable with EEG and has been documented extensively in neuroscience literature. The FFR can be visualized in real-time, showing how the brain's electrical patterns lock onto external frequencies with remarkable precision. [5]
The principle has been used in various contexts: meditation aids, sleep optimization, focus enhancement, and even experimental treatments for anxiety and ADHD. But as we'll see, how you achieve entrainment matters as much as the target frequency itself.
The Frequency Following Response (FFR) - How It Works
The FFR is generated through multiple cortical and subcortical pathways. When you're exposed to rhythmic stimulation—whether auditory, visual, or electromagnetic—your auditory midbrain and cortex respond by synchronizing neural firing patterns to match. [5] Recent research using magnetoencephalography (MEG) has revealed that both midbrain (subcortical) and auditory cortex (cortical) structures contribute to the FFR, challenging earlier assumptions that it was purely a brainstem phenomenon. [6]
Precision
FFR tracks stimulus frequency with remarkable accuracy, often within fractions of a Hertz
Multiple Sources
Both the auditory midbrain and cortex contribute to the response [6]
Individual Variation
Response strength varies based on neural health, age, and baseline brain state
This is well-established neuroscience. The debate isn't whether FFR exists—it's about the best way to leverage it for cognitive optimization.
Common Additive Entrainment Methods
Binaural Beats
Playing slightly different frequencies in each ear (e.g., 200Hz left, 210Hz right) creates a perceived 10Hz "beat" that the brain follows. This phantom frequency is generated through neural processing rather than existing as an acoustic phenomenon in the air. [1]
Isochronic Tones
Rhythmic pulses of a single tone turned on and off at the desired frequency (e.g., 10Hz pulses for alpha entrainment). Research suggests isochronic tones may have a 15% higher effect in modulating brain wave frequency compared to binaural beats, particularly for prefrontal cortex activity. [4]
Audiovisual Entrainment (AVE)
Combining rhythmic light (through LED goggles) and sound for multi-sensory stimulation, targeting visual and auditory pathways simultaneously.
All of these are additive approaches—they introduce new frequencies into your environment to guide brain state. They've been commercially available since the 1980s and have accumulated a substantial research base over the past four decades.
The Additive Approach: Adding Frequencies
How Binaural Beats Work (Technical Explanation)
When you listen to a 200Hz tone in your left ear and a 210Hz tone in your right ear, your brain doesn't hear two separate tones—it perceives a third "phantom" frequency: the 10Hz difference. This happens through neural processing in the brainstem and auditory cortex, where the slight phase difference between the two ears is interpreted as a rhythmic beat. [1]
The 10Hz beat is created inside your head, not in the air. This is why binaural beats only work with headphones—the two tones must be separated and delivered independently to each ear for the effect to occur. If you play binaural beats through speakers, the frequencies mix in the air and you just hear two tones, not the beat.
Proponents claim that by targeting specific frequencies—10Hz for alpha relaxation, 4Hz for delta sleep, 40Hz for gamma focus—you can guide your brain into desired states on demand, like tuning a radio to different stations.
The Research on Efficacy - What Studies Actually Show
This is where it gets interesting. The research on additive entrainment is... mixed.
Meta-Analysis Findings
A 2022 meta-analysis examining 15 studies and 31 effect sizes found an overall medium effect (Cohen's g = 0.40) for binaural beats on memory and attention tasks. [1] That's a real, measurable effect—roughly equivalent to a moderate intervention, comparable to many accepted cognitive enhancement techniques.
But there's a catch: The same meta-analysis noted "conflicting results" for specific frequencies, with theta and beta bands showing inconsistent efficacy across different studies. What worked in one lab didn't necessarily replicate in another. [1]
Systematic Review Reality Check
A 2023 systematic review took a more critical look at the field. Of 14 reviewed studies:
- 5 studies (36%) reported results supporting brainwave entrainment
- 8 studies (57%) reported contradictory results
- 1 study (7%) had mixed results
The review's conclusion was sobering: literature on brainwave entrainment effects "appears to be inconclusive at best." [2] The studies were described as "very heterogeneous regarding the implementation of the binaural beats, the experimental designs, and the EEG parameters," making it difficult to draw firm conclusions about when and why the technique works. [2]
Recent 2025 Research
A parametric investigation published in Scientific Reports found that gamma frequency binaural beats improved general attention performance but did not reduce vigilance decline over time—meaning they helped with immediate focus but didn't prevent the natural drop-off in sustained attention. [3] Crucially, the study confirmed brain entrainment via EEG but noted that effectiveness "varied with BB parameters and background noise." [3]
That last point is critical: background noise affects how well binaural beats work.
Literature on brainwave entrainment effects appears to be inconclusive at best.
—Jirakittayakorn & Wongsawat, 2023 [2]
Limitations and Why Results Vary
Why such inconsistent results across studies? Several factors emerge:
- Methodology heterogeneity: Studies use wildly different protocols—varying frequencies, session durations, delivery methods, and measurement techniques—making comparisons difficult [2]
- Background noise interference: Effectiveness decreases in noisy environments, as external interference competes with the entrainment stimulus [3]
- Individual differences: Baseline brain state, age, neural health, and even personality factors affect how strongly someone responds to entrainment
- Publication bias: Positive results are more likely to be published than null findings, potentially inflating the apparent effectiveness
Most importantly: Additive entrainment doesn't address the baseline electromagnetic environment. You're adding stimulus on top of existing interference, which may explain why results vary so much between controlled laboratory settings and real-world applications.
When Additive Entrainment Works
Despite these limitations, additive entrainment has legitimate use cases where the approach makes sense:
Short-term state shifts
Pre-sleep relaxation, meditation preparation, acute focus needs before important tasks
Controlled environments
Quiet settings with minimal EMF interference, where the added frequency can work without competing with environmental noise
Acute interventions
Brief, targeted sessions for specific tasks (e.g., 20-minute focus session before deep work)
Complement to other practices
Enhancing meditation, breathwork, or other mindfulness practices
Best suited for: Deliberate, time-limited sessions where you're consciously adding stimulus for a specific purpose.
Not ideal for: 24/7 baseline optimization or addressing chronic environmental interference that persists regardless of what you're doing.
The Compensatory Approach: Neutralizing Interference
The Unavoidable EMF Problem
Here's the uncomfortable truth: you're swimming in electromagnetic fields right now.
Power line noise at 50 and 60 Hz is bang in the middle of the spectrum of brain activity. [7] This isn't a minor technical detail—it's a major problem in EEG research and has fundamentally shaped how neuroscientists study the brain. Researchers have had to develop sophisticated filtering techniques specifically to separate the signal they want to measure (brain activity) from the noise they can't eliminate (power grid interference).
"In EEG recordings, as in other bio-signal measurements, one of the major problems is the 50 (or 60) Hz noise due to power lines." [8] The interference happens through multiple pathways: capacitive coupling between power lines and the subject, magnetic field induction in electrode cables, and displacement currents on the scalp caused by electrical fields. [8]
Sometimes the interference is so severe that "cables carrying ECG and EEG signals from the examination room to the monitoring equipment are susceptible to electromagnetic interference of power frequency so much so that sometimes the ECG and EEG recordings are totally masked by this type of noise." [8]
Power line noise at 50 and 60 Hz is bang in the middle of the spectrum of brain activity.
—Sapien Labs [7]
You can't escape it. Every wall outlet, power line, electrical device, and piece of modern technology creates a 50 or 60Hz electromagnetic field (depending on your region) that overlaps directly with your brain's delta (0.5-4Hz), theta (4-8Hz), and alpha (8-12Hz) frequency bands.
Why Physical Removal Isn't Feasible
The obvious solution? Remove the interference entirely.
But that's not practical for most people:
Requires complete room enclosure with specialized materials, costs tens of thousands of dollars, and still requires meticulous installation to be effective
Blocks all electromagnetic fields, which means no WiFi, no cell signal, no wireless communication of any kind—not viable for modern life
Power grids extend everywhere in developed nations; even rural areas have 50/60Hz exposure from transmission lines that can extend for miles
You'd essentially need to live in an electromagnetically shielded bunker, isolated from the conveniences and connectivity of modern society, to truly eliminate power grid interference. For most people, that's not happening.
So if you can't remove the interference, what can you do? Compensate for it.
Active Cancellation Principles - The Engineering Solution
Active noise cancellation (ANC) is mature, well-understood engineering technology with decades of research and commercial application. [10] The principle is elegant in its simplicity:
Detect the interference
Measure the unwanted signal in real-time
Generate an inverted signal
Create a waveform with the same amplitude but opposite phase (180 degrees out of phase)
Add them together
When the original signal and inverted signal combine, they cancel through destructive interference
This is exactly how noise-cancelling headphones work. [10] They don't physically block sound waves—they add an inverted acoustic wave that cancels the noise at your eardrum. The background noise is still present in the environment, but you don't hear it because the headphones have neutralized it at the point of perception.
The same principle applies to electromagnetic fields.
By detecting the 50 or 60Hz grid interference in real-time (using a magnetometer or similar sensor), you can generate a compensatory signal—same frequency, inverted phase—to neutralize its effects on neural activity. The electromagnetic field is still present in the environment, but its disruptive influence on your brain's natural rhythms is cancelled out.
Key Advantages of ANC [10]
- Works in real-world, unshielded environments (no isolation required)
- Real-time adaptation to changing interference patterns
- Selective cancellation (targets specific frequencies while leaving others untouched)
Key Limitation [10]
- Latency matters—delay between detection and cancellation reduces effectiveness
- Works best for low-frequency, stationary noise (perfect match for 50/60Hz power grids, which are highly stable)
The "Noise-Cancelling Headphones" Effect for Your Brain
Think of compensatory entrainment as noise-cancelling headphones, but for electromagnetic interference affecting your brain:
Additive Entrainment
Like playing music louder to drown out background noise—you're adding more sound, and both the music and the noise are present
Compensatory Entrainment
Like ANC headphones that neutralize the noise itself through phase cancellation—you're adding something, but what you're adding specifically cancels the interference
Both approaches add something to the environment. But what they add is fundamentally different in purpose and mechanism.
Additive adds a new stimulus designed to push your brain into a different state.
Compensatory adds an inverted signal designed to cancel existing interference, allowing your brain's natural rhythms to emerge without disruption.
The goal isn't to force your brain into a new state—it's to remove the obstacle that's preventing it from reaching its natural optimal state. Your brain has spent millions of years evolving sophisticated timing mechanisms; maybe the problem isn't that it needs external guidance, but that modern electromagnetic pollution is interfering with systems that worked perfectly well for our ancestors.
Signal-to-Noise Ratio: Why Compensation Wins for Baseline Optimization
Understanding Neural Signal-to-Noise
Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is defined as the ratio of meaningful information (signal) to background interference (noise). [12] In any measurement or recording system—whether it's audio equipment, radio communication, or neural recordings—SNR determines how clearly you can detect the signal you care about.
In neuroscience, SNR critically affects our ability to detect and measure brain activity. [12, 13] The higher the SNR, the clearer the neural signal, and the more accurately we can understand what the brain is doing. When SNR is low (high noise relative to signal), even sophisticated analysis techniques struggle to extract meaningful patterns from the data.
Two Types of Noise in Neural Systems [12]
- External noise: Environmental interference like power grid EMF, radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices, and other electromagnetic pollution
- Internal noise: The brain's ongoing background activity—billions of neurons firing in complex patterns that create a constant hum of neural activity
EEG research has demonstrated that SNR directly affects phase tracking accuracy. [13] During periods of high SNR, researchers can precisely track brain oscillations and measure how different regions synchronize. During low SNR periods, the signal gets lost in the noise, making accurate measurement nearly impossible.
Critical insight: You can't change internal noise much—it's an inherent property of having a brain that's constantly processing information, maintaining homeostasis, and running background operations. But you can address external noise—and 50/60Hz power grid interference is one of the most pervasive external noise sources in modern environments.
How Interference Masks Natural Rhythms
Imagine trying to have a conversation in a restaurant where the sound system is locked on a constant 60Hz drone. You can speak louder (the additive approach), but the drone is still there, interfering with every word, making comprehension harder even as volume increases.
With Additive Entrainment
Natural brain rhythm (signal) + Power grid interference (noise) + Added frequency (more signal) = Increased total complexity
With Compensatory Entrainment
Natural brain rhythm (signal) + Power grid interference (noise) + Inverted interference (anti-noise) = Clearer baseline
The math of destructive interference is straightforward: when you add two waves of equal amplitude and opposite phase, they cancel. The power grid interference is still present in the environment, but its effect on neural activity is neutralized, improving SNR.
Better SNR = clearer brain rhythms = better natural self-regulation.
The Case for Environmental Optimization Over Stimulation
Your brain didn't evolve with binaural beats. It evolved over millions of years to self-regulate without external frequency guidance, using sophisticated endogenous timing mechanisms. [14, 15]
Your nervous system has:
- Master circadian clock in the suprachiasmatic nuclei (SCN) of the hypothalamus, coordinating daily rhythms in physiology and behavior [14]
- Multiple peripheral oscillators distributed throughout the brain and body—in the heart, liver, kidneys, and even individual cells—each maintaining their own rhythms while coordinating with the master clock [15]
- Homeostatic mechanisms that automatically adjust timing and synchronization based on environmental cues (light/dark cycles, temperature, activity patterns) [14]
Recent research has revealed that "the SCN is not the only circadian oscillator in mammalian systems." [15] Multiple brain regions show independent rhythmic activity, with different properties and functions, creating a distributed network of biological timekeepers.
The problem isn't that your brain lacks the ability to reach optimal states—it's that the modern electromagnetic environment disrupts these endogenous rhythms that evolved in an environment free from artificial 50/60Hz fields.
Compensatory Approach
Remove the environmental disruption, let natural self-regulation resume
Additive Approach
Override natural rhythms with external stimulus
Both work, but they address fundamentally different problems. One says "your brain needs external guidance," the other says "your brain needs the interference removed so it can guide itself."
The Practical Comparison
Use Case Matrix - When to Use Each Approach
Additive Entrainment - Best For:
| Use Case | Why It Works | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-sleep relaxation | Adding 4Hz delta encourages sleep onset | 20-minute wind-down session with delta binaural beats |
| Meditation enhancement | 10Hz alpha reinforces meditative state | Guided meditation with alpha isochronic tones |
| Acute focus sessions | 40Hz gamma for short-term concentration | 25-minute Pomodoro session with gamma entrainment |
| Specific state induction | Targeting precise brain states on demand | Rapid state shift before important meeting or exam |
Ideal conditions: Quiet environment, time-limited sessions (15-60 minutes), specific desired outcome, controlled setting
Compensatory Entrainment - Best For:
| Use Case | Why It Works | Example |
|---|---|---|
| 24/7 baseline optimization | Continuous cancellation of ambient grid interference | Always-on background compensation during work, sleep, daily activities |
| Circadian rhythm restoration | Removes disruption to natural timing systems | Letting SCN and peripheral oscillators function without 50/60Hz interference |
| Chronic stress reduction | Lowers constant low-level EMF stress on nervous system | Reducing baseline electromagnetic load over weeks/months |
| Natural state emergence | Lets endogenous oscillators function properly | Allowing brain to self-regulate to optimal state without external forcing |
Ideal conditions: Ongoing optimization, addressing environmental root cause, long-term neural health, real-world unshielded environments
Can They Be Combined?
Yes—and there may be synergistic benefits.
Use compensatory entrainment continuously to neutralize ambient 50/60Hz interference, creating a cleaner electromagnetic environment
Layer additive entrainment (binaural beats, isochronic tones) on top for specific sessions when you want targeted state changes
Think of it like:
- Compensatory = Turning down background noise (raising SNR)
- Additive = Playing music you actually want to hear (adding desired signal)
With a cleaner baseline environment created by compensation, additive methods may actually be more effective—remember, binaural beat efficacy "varied with background noise." [3] If you reduce background noise through compensation, the added signal from binaural beats should work better, meeting less interference and competition.
This is speculative—no head-to-head studies comparing combined approaches exist yet—but the logic is sound: better SNR should improve response to any intervention, whether pharmaceutical, behavioral, or frequency-based.
What the Research Suggests
For Additive Entrainment
- Moderate evidence of efficacy with medium effect size (g = 0.40) [1]
- Inconsistent results across studies and frequencies [2]
- Works better in controlled, quiet environments [3]
- Decades of research with mixed but real findings
For Compensatory Entrainment
- No direct randomized controlled trials yet (novel application of established principles)
- Based on solid foundation: active noise cancellation engineering [10], documented EMF interference [7, 8], endogenous rhythms [14, 15]
- Logical extension of proven techniques, but needs empirical validation in controlled studies
The research gap: No randomized controlled trials comparing additive vs. compensatory entrainment head-to-head. No long-term studies examining chronic use of compensatory approaches. This is a theoretical framework supported by established principles from multiple fields (neuroscience, electrical engineering, chronobiology) but awaiting the dedicated research that additive methods have received.
We're presenting the engineering logic and scientific rationale, not claiming proven superiority.
The compensatory approach deserves investigation precisely because it addresses a documented problem (power grid EMF interference with neural activity) using established principles (active cancellation) in a novel application (real-time electromagnetic compensation for brain optimization).
Conclusion
Summary of Key Differences
We've explored two fundamentally different approaches to brain optimization, each with distinct mechanisms, applications, and underlying philosophies:
Additive Entrainment
Adds new frequencies to guide your brain into desired states. It leverages the frequency following response, has been researched for decades (with moderate, if inconsistent, results), and works well for short-term interventions in controlled settings. The limitation: it doesn't address the baseline electromagnetic environment—you're adding signal on top of unavoidable noise, which may explain the high variability in results across studies.
Compensatory Entrainment
Uses active cancellation principles to neutralize the effects of unavoidable 50/60Hz power grid interference, improving signal-to-noise ratio so your brain's natural endogenous rhythms can function without disruption. It's based on established engineering principles (ANC) applied to a documented problem (EMF interference with neural activity), but hasn't yet accumulated the research base that additive methods have built over four decades.
Neither is categorically "better"—they solve different problems. Additive asks "what frequency should I add?" Compensatory asks "what interference should I cancel?"
The Paradigm Shift
The shift from additive to compensatory thinking represents a fundamental change in how we approach brain optimization:
"What frequency should I add to my brain to achieve X state?"
"What environmental interference should I compensate for to let my brain reach its natural optimal state?"
It's the difference between playing music louder to drown out background noise and using noise-cancelling technology to remove the background noise itself.
Both approaches change what you experience. But the mechanisms—and potentially the long-term implications for neural health—are profoundly different. One adds to the complexity of your electromagnetic environment. The other subtracts from it through intelligent cancellation.
Experience Compensatory Entrainment
Want to explore compensatory entrainment in practice? NullField Lab uses real-time magnetometer detection to identify ambient 50/60Hz EMF interference in your immediate environment and generates precision compensation signals based on active noise cancellation principles.
It's not about adding frequencies to force your brain into new states. It's about neutralizing the electromagnetic pollution that's been disrupting your brain's natural rhythms since the moment you were born into a world filled with power grids.
Your brain already knows what to do. Maybe it just needs the interference removed so it can do it.
Experience active EMF compensation in real-time
References
- Garcia-Argibay, M., Santed, M. A., & Reales, J. M. (2022). Potential of binaural beats intervention for improving memory and attention: insights from meta-analysis and systematic review. Psychological Research, 87, 1341–1365. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00426-022-01706-7
- Jirakittayakorn, N., & Wongsawat, Y. (2023). Binaural beats to entrain the brain? A systematic review of the effects of binaural beat stimulation on brain oscillatory activity, and the implications for psychological research and intervention. PLoS ONE, 18(5). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10198548/
- Chen, Y.-J., Huang, W.-T., Wu, C.-Y., et al. (2025). A parametric investigation of binaural beats for brain entrainment and enhancing sustained attention. Scientific Reports, 15, 2683. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-88517-z
- Munro, B. A., & Searchfield, G. D. (2021). Effects of binaural beats and isochronic tones on brain wave modulation: Literature review. Revista Mexicana de Neurociencia, 22(6), 238-245. https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1665-50442021000600238
- Skoe, E., & Kraus, N. (2010). Analyzing the FFR: A tutorial for decoding the richness of auditory function. In The Frequency-Following Response: A Window into Human Communication. Springer. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6778514/
- Coffey, E. B. J., Herholz, S. C., Chepesiuk, A. M. P., Baillet, S., & Zatorre, R. J. (2016). Cortical contributions to the auditory frequency-following response revealed by MEG. Nature Communications, 7, 11070. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13003-w
- Sapien Labs. (2020). How the Power Grid Has Shaped EEG Research. https://sapienlabs.org/how-the-power-grid-has-shaped-eeg-research/
- Usakli, A. B. (2010). Improvement of EEG signal acquisition: An electrical aspect for state of the art of front end. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2010, Article 630649. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2817545/
- Intechopen. (2014). Cancelling Harmonic Power Line Interference in Biopotentials. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/59985
- Kuo, S. M., & Morgan, D. R. (1999). Active noise control: a tutorial review. Proceedings of the IEEE, 87(6), 943-973. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/763310/
- Wikipedia. (2024). Active noise control. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_noise_control
- Scholarpedia. (2024). Signal-to-noise ratio in neuroscience. http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Signal-to-noise_ratio_in_neuroscience
- Schaworonkow, N., & Voytek, B. (2023). EEG Phase Can Be Predicted with Similar Accuracy across Cognitive States after Accounting for Power and Signal-to-Noise Ratio. eNeuro, 10(9), ENEURO.0050-23.2023. https://www.eneuro.org/content/10/9/ENEURO.0050-23.2023
- NCBI StatPearls. (2025). Physiology, Circadian Rhythm. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519507/
- Guilding, C., & Piggins, H. D. (2007). A riot of rhythms: neuronal and glial circadian oscillators in the mediobasal hypothalamus. Molecular Brain, 2, 28. https://molecularbrain.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1756-6606-2-28
Disclaimer
NullField Lab is a research tool, not a medical device. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. The compensatory entrainment approach described is based on established engineering principles (active noise cancellation) applied to a novel context (electromagnetic interference compensation), but has not undergone randomized controlled trials for safety and efficacy. Consult with healthcare professionals for medical concerns. TGA Classification: Not a Therapeutic Good.
