Experiencing distress is inevitable, especially for young adults. Balancing personal life, relationships, interests, and academic demands creates a breeding ground for stress. Nearly 90% of Dutch people aged 18–35 say daily stress affects their mental resilience. In 2023, 40% reported stress-related mental disorders, raising clinical concern. To tackle these rising stress levels, many have turned to mindfulness. Scientific research validates mindfulness for its cognitive improvements and applicability across settings like schools and workplaces. The increase in evidence-based mind-body practices reflects a generational need for stress relief. Yet, alongside these scientifically validated methods, so-called ‘pseudoscientific’ practices—like hypnotherapy—persist. Often phenomenologically contrasted, but sometimes overlapping with meditation, hypnotherapy prompts the question: how have these ‘pseudoscientific’ methods endured?

Subjectivity of Stress

Frequent, untreated distress can increase the risk of psychological disorders by affecting brain structure, and can lead to physical illness. There is no simple single treatment for stress due to its inherently subjective nature. Like all psychological experiences, stress is never neutral—there is no concrete collective definition. Stress is commonly defined as a state of worry caused by a difficult situation, a deviation from ‘normal’ behaviour or thinking—but what is ‘normal’? This makes it difficult to approach stress, as the directionality of this deviation from ‘normality’ is ambiguous: to ease stress, should we increase certain behaviours, or reduce others? Since distress is perceived differently by each person, so are the methods to manage it. Considering the imperative role subjective interpretation plays in both stress-management and treatment, I set out to personally explore one such method.

Considering Consciousness

I had the pleasure of experiencing one ‘pseudoscientific’ method, hypnotherapy, at Balans in Trance, with Desiree Stoffels. After an introduction to hypnotherapy, we discussed the mystical nature of consciousness—foundational to the ambiguous ‘normal’ mind. Consciousness remains a philosophical mystery. It allows subjective experience and underlies basic perception. A theory emerging from hypnosis research suggests a divided mind: one interacting with external reality, the other influenced by a ‘hidden observer’, if we can disrupt this hidden observer, we may overcome stress. As Desiree explained, during hypnosis the ‘hidden observer’ is “out drinking coffee ” — allowing an opportunity to introduce new insights in the unconscious mind. Hypnosis as such, she emphasised, is self-induced: the hypnotherapist is merely a guide. Our conversation highlighted that nothing objective can be concluded about the (un)conscious mind. So why is there a general preference for meditation/breathing techniques, and simultaneous skepticism toward methods like hypnotherapy? If consciousness is inherently subjective, and experience varies for everyone, why pretend there’s a single objective consensus on stress relief?

Enter Hypnotherapy

This ambiguity around consciousness is exactly what drew me to hypnotherapy. In our session, Desiree Stoffels introduced me to two forms of hypnosis. Indirect hypnosis relies on sensations to spark internal change, while direct hypnosis aims for somnambulism—a deep hypnotic state where suggestions can address the sensory roots of certain behaviors, phobias, or emotions. Desiree has run her clinic, Balans in Trance, for about 1.5 years. She told me hypnotherapy may support the immune system, and that 95% of people can enter a hypnotic state. Stress, she explained, is one of the key areas where hypnotherapy shines—especially since self-hypnosis can be taught after just a single session. She reaffirmed the importance of hitting the mental ‘pause’ button, making space in our minds and bodies. Like an iceberg, most of our unconscious mind remains submerged under the surface. From a psychological perspective, the ability to be hypnotised is known as ‘absorption’, an objective demarcation of suggestibility. However, Desiree stressed the distinction between doing and attempting hypnosis: “Hypnosis is not something you attempt. It requires a mindset that says, ‘I want to do this, I will and can do this.’” This meaningful shift, from trying hypnosis to doing it, challenges the idea of ‘absorption’ . In fact, it’s this framing of hypnotherapy as something to be ‘attempted’ that perpetuates skepticism. It allows the ‘pseudoscience’ label to linger, not because hypnotherapy lacks value, but because we keep treating it like a maybe rather than a method.

Experiencing ‘Pseudoscience’

When I asked what it was like to be under hypnosis, Desiree gently corrected me: “Hypnosis isn’t something you’re under, it’s something you’re in a complete body-mind relaxation” . Being in hypnosis means you individually allow the state; you’re not subordinate, but equal to it. Soon after, I found myself in the chair, following her calm instructions. My memories are fuzzy, but I clearly recall the feeling of my body sinking into the chair as one unified limb towards the floor, mind quiet. As I was instructed to go deeper, I felt a peace I had never reached before. Afterwards haziness lingered, not from confusion, but from insight. Thoughts I could not fully explain surfaced. That brief moment, though a mere snapshot of serenity, revealed how powerful mind-body practices can be. Yet it also left me frustrated. Because why are such deeply personal, effective methods still dismissed by science? If we know so little about the (un)conscious mind, why are we so quick to discredit what we cannot yet explain?

Boundaries of (Psychological) Classification

What defines hypnotherapy as ‘pseudoscience’ is not evidence, but unpopularity. Unlike meditation, hypnosis remains underused and misunderstood. We must not forget that subjectivity is inherent to the human experience. No psychological study escapes individual variation, yet we continue to seek general rules for deeply personal phenomena. This is where my disappointment lies. Labels like ‘pseudoscience’, ‘absorption’, or ‘alternative medicine’ institutionally perpetuate skepticism and erode credibility. Because while mindfulness is now embraced, even compared to antidepressants for anxiety, hypnotherapy has shown promising, sometimes superior, effects on depression symptoms. Still, only 0.3% of Dutch people underwent hypnotherapy in 2019, likely because labeling, not lived experience, determines legitimacy. My own session taught me that hypnosis opens up an endless space of internal possibilities. Why confine this by labeling? Any approach that people perceive as helpful should be interpreted as precisely that. ‘Pseudoscientific’ methods have persisted for centuries because people feel the effects. Desiree dreams of hypnosis being taught in schools to help new generations manage and prevent stress. Hypnosis can change lives. Once scientific validations extend to popularity, its potential can be unleashed, and then, as Desiree says, it will be time to activate “the positive within ourselves”.

Banner photo by MK Hamilton on Unsplash