2026 peer-reviewed publication
Sysoev and Budko’s Lifetune ONE paper is now published in Psychophysiology News, 2026, issue 1, pages 95–104. It reports EEG recovery after initial activation and increasing coherence after seven days of use. Read the published-study summary and documented peer-review history, or open the original journal paper at page 95.
Document type: institutional research report, 2024. Evidence type: exploratory human physiology. Product: Lifetune ONE. The related 2025 manuscript is another version of this study.
The 2024 report by T.G. Kuznetsova, V.N. Sysoev and L.A. Rybina, with A.P. Fedorova, investigates Lifetune ONE during brief mobile-phone exposure and a seven-day follow-up. The 2025 English manuscript by Sysoev and Rybina describes the same experiment, not a separate replication.
Twenty-four men aged 20–24 were recruited. The original report describes exclusions; its appendix and later English version use different analysis denominators. The acute comparison tables include 14 participants and the seven-day subgroup includes seven. Recruitment must not be presented as the sample size for every result.
Findings and interpretation
The authors interpret selected EEG connectivity observations and autonomic trends as favorable with Lifetune ONE. However, the principal alpha EEG and HRV comparisons were not statistically significant. Participants began within physiological EEG norms; the report describes brief activation after phone exposure followed by recovery, rather than an established sustained injury. Nonsignificance does not prove no effect, but favorable trends do not establish a treatment effect.
The frequently quoted coherence values of 0.4 and 0.7 come from selected connectivity illustrations, not a demonstrated cohort-wide improvement in health. Selected color-test comparisons were reported at p=0.04 and p=0.05; the many comparisons and unclear multiplicity handling limit interpretation.
What needs clarification
Analysis denominators, condition labels across language versions, and the provenance of dated EEG images need reconciliation with the study authors. The English manuscript describes blinded recording and analysis; the available documents do not establish a fully specified randomized sham-controlled protocol. No clinical disease-prevention outcome or simultaneous physical field-coherence measurement was demonstrated.
Read the sources: 2024 original report (PDF) · 2025 English manuscript (DOCX).
Read the English-version guide · Browse human studies
Sources and disclosure
This is an Aires editorial summary. Aires sells the products discussed and has a commercial interest in the research. Institutional affiliation, an external author, or a third-party opinion alone does not establish financial independence. Where a linked report does not establish funding or the sponsor’s role, those details remain unconfirmed. Original researchers retain authorship of their work.
The original-source evidence library distinguishes journal articles, conference papers, research reports and expert opinions. Reports, translations and later manuscripts describing the same experiment should not be counted as independent replications.
Editorial update: October 25, 2026 · Josh, Aires. This page explains research and its limitations; it is not a diagnosis or a claim that an Aires product prevents or treats disease.