A wave of recent scientific research is challenging the common perception that meditation and mindfulness are universally beneficial, ignoring their potential to cause significant harm for some practitioners. While meditation, rooted in centuries-old Buddhist traditions and widely promoted in modern Thailand as a stress-relieving and wellness-enhancing practice, reports now highlight overlooked adverse effects—including anxiety, depression, dissociation, and even psychotic episodes. As mindfulness gains popularity across Thai schools, corporate offices, and healthcare settings, these revelations carry urgent implications for local practitioners, educators, and policymakers.
For Thai readers who have seen mindfulness and meditation championed by temples, wellness apps, and even the public health sector as simple cures for the stresses of daily life, this new evidence raises critical questions. The Dharmatrāta Meditation Scripture, dating back over 1,500 years to Buddhist communities in India, documented unusual psychological symptoms such as depression and cognitive distortions following meditation. Yet, in contemporary Thailand, discussions about these possible negative outcomes are often absent in the nation’s growing mindfulness movement.
Recent studies underscore that adverse effects from meditation are neither rare nor restricted to those with a history of mental illness. A 2022 US-based study cited in the article surveyed 953 regular meditators and found that over 10 percent experienced negative effects—such as persistent anxiety, depression, dissociation, or psychosis—for more than a month, significantly impairing daily function (ScienceAlert). A comprehensive review spanning 40 years of mindfulness research also revealed that even people with no prior mental health challenges can be affected, with symptoms ranging from mild fear to severe psychological distress.
Such findings are echoed in western scientific literature. As early as 1976, a groundbreaking cognitive-behavioral scientist warned that indiscriminate use of meditation could trigger psychiatric problems, including psychotic breakdowns. More recent research, such as an $8 million study funded by the Wellcome Trust, examined over 8,000 UK children and found that mindfulness programs not only failed to improve overall wellbeing but actually harmed those predisposed to mental health issues (Wellcome Trust Study Summary).
Despite the Buddhist roots of mindfulness, its global commercialization—what one ordained Buddhist teacher and management professor dubs “McMindfulness”—is now a multi-billion dollar industry, with little regulation or acknowledgment of risks (ScienceAlert). The mindfulness “boom” has been enthusiastically adopted by Thai meditation centers, online wellness companies, and educational institutions. However, the lack of warning labels or safety guidance for participants stands in contrast to the robust debate about side effects now taking place internationally.
According to an associate professor of experimental psychology at Coventry University, quoted in the report, the problem is not the lack of benefits—mindfulness can indeed boost wellbeing for some—but the near-complete silence on adverse effects by the mindfulness industry. This omission persists despite clear evidence of harm. Many foreign-trained mindfulness instructors, and teachers in Thailand, remain unaware of these risks or resort to platitudes when confronted with student reports of distress, telling them to keep meditating until symptoms cease. Such advice can deepen suffering and erode trust in these popular practices.
In Thailand, where mindfulness is frequently incorporated into primary and secondary school curriculums as a means to foster emotional resilience and academic focus, these revelations demand a careful reconsideration of policy. The 2022 UK school study shows that without proper safeguards, children at risk of mental illness may face greater harm from mindfulness interventions than previously thought. Thai educators and the Ministry of Education would be wise to consult emerging research and revise program guidelines to ensure vulnerable youths are not placed at risk.
The risks are not limited to young people. Thai professionals, particularly those in high-pressure sectors such as healthcare, have also turned to mindfulness through workplace wellness programs. Without adequate screening, supervision, and support, employees may be left coping with severe side effects in silence. In some cases, as reported in academic handbooks and on support websites set up for affected meditators, symptoms have lasted for weeks or months and required clinical intervention (ScienceAlert).
At the core of the current debate is an ethical question: Should those who sell meditation apps, teach mindfulness classes, or prescribe meditation in clinical settings be obliged to inform users of possible risks? The consensus emerging among global experts is yes—transparency and informed consent must be prioritized. In the United States, a clinical service has even been established to help meditators grappling with serious or long-term side effects—a model Thai health authorities may wish to study as the popularity of mindfulness continues to grow.
Lack of understanding among teachers is not the only challenge. As the Coventry University scholar notes, psychology as a science still struggles to explain the full spectrum of consciousness-altering states brought about by meditation. This limits the guidance that can be offered for practicing mindfulness safely. Thus, teachers, monks, and policymakers must rely on emerging evidence, open dialogue, and ethical consideration to steer the nation’s approach.
For Thailand, a country where Buddhism and meditation are woven deeply into social and spiritual life, the issue is especially sensitive. Mindfulness has long been believed to offer protection against suffering and promotion of moral conduct. But the rise of commercialized, “one-size-fits-all” mindfulness, stripped from its traditional safeguards, raises the likelihood that risks are being overlooked both by practitioners and the wider community.
Going forward, Thai society faces a crossroads. Should mindfulness education be more strictly regulated? Should school and workplace programs include explicit warnings and offer support for those who experience adverse outcomes? International best practices indicate a need for more transparent teacher training, risk screening for mental health vulnerabilities, and ready avenues for help when side effects occur. Importantly, greater investments in research—especially studies rooted in Thai contexts—will be essential to ensure mindfulness contributes to, not detracts from, the health and happiness of all.
For now, Thais keen to embrace mindfulness should stay informed, seek out teachers or clinical psychologists with awareness of possible adverse effects, and approach meditation practice gradually—especially if they have a history of mental health struggles. Teachers and institutions must keep up with the latest scientific literature and adopt a balanced perspective, ensuring mindfulness is delivered as a therapeutic tool with both its benefits and risks clearly understood.
As new research emerges and global attitudes evolve, Thailand’s blend of tradition and innovation places it in a unique position to model an ethical, evidence-based approach to mindfulness—one that truly serves the welfare of all.
For readers interested in further insights, comprehensive overviews of adverse effects can be found in resources such as the “Buddha Pill” book, academic handbooks, and specialized online support communities. Practical recommendations include asking mindfulness coaches and institutions about their knowledge of risks, starting with brief sessions, and monitoring mental health closely throughout the process.
In the words of international experts, informed mindfulness is effective mindfulness—let us not let enthusiasm eclipse caution.