What clinical hypnotherapy actually does for gay men (and the myths that stop people trying it).

Aug 11

Can I be honest with you?! Hypnotherapy is like a red-headed child that nobody knew what to do with, so medicine and psychiatry dropped it on the floor, and people who picked it up are either highly trained physicians and psychotherapists or … coaches with no education and training in human psychology.

Wild! I know.

Well, let’s start with the definition. Because even if you’re a licensed therapist, chances are you either think that hypnosis is a scam by life coaches or a gimmick that we stopped using right after Freudian psychoanalysis, so you might be surprised.

*1 In 2014, the Div. 30 Executive Committee prepared the following official definitions related to hypnosis:

Hypnosis: A state of consciousness involving focused attention and reduced peripheral awareness characterized by an enhanced capacity for response to suggestion.
Hypnotic induction: A procedure designed to induce hypnosis.
Hypnotizability: An individual’s ability to experience suggested alterations in physiology, sensations, emotions, thoughts, or behavior during hypnosis.
Hypnotherapy: The use of hypnosis in the treatment of a medical or psychological disorder or concern.

Does hypnosis actually work? Yes, and there are studies, and… we also lack a lot of studies for the areas that I have seen it work wonderfully well.

I did some digging, and the first result kind of shocked me.

*2 Hypnosis works very well for IBS / Gut-Directed Hypnotherapy

Another study was on pain. And yes, in my practice I have seen it, and it never stops amazing me how quickly it works.

*3 I had a client with a stiff neck, and they just asked if hypnosis could work for them and their issues; we decided to try, and that worked wonders!

But does it work for grief or navigating adjustment difficulties after a breakup or divorce, or difficult life transitions?

Yes, and obviously not by itself.

Per my experience, hypnosis is a wonderful self-regulation tool too, and it works wonderfully for a variety of issues with one caveat.

It must have another foundation in it, such as IFS, EFT, CBT, or motivational interviewing.

The way I work with this, I always start with motivational interviewing with a frame of Internal Family Systems (IFS).

What is Motivational Interviewing? Motivation is

whatever actually gets someone moving: acting, changing, or growing.

No one is unmotivated. People are always doing something even if it’s sleep-

ing or relaxing. MI is a specific form of interviewing. When practicing MI, the inter-

viewer has a guiding role in using the particular skills

MI is widely used in counseling, addiction counseling, coaching, and even sales.

How it works.

I always start with an intake session and motivational interviewing. Many hypnotists mention pre-talk; this is where hypnotherapy actually fails. If a client is unclear or not ready to change, the hypnosis by itself is not going to work.

Yes MI + IFS.

When I do the hypnosis part, it’s actually way easier to connect with the internal parts of the mind; this is where IFS comes in and play wonderfully. IFS is my philosophy and foundation, and I also interchange Ego-States therapy and IFS as needed; they all work with parts.

Good Hypnotherapy.

Good hypnotherapy is my practice I opened this year. After a decade working as a therapist, taking a break and journey in tech after a few years after my immigration to the US, I am back in the mental health space.

Good hypnotherapy heavily focuses on gay men, specifically gay men who’re navigating a divorce or breakup, midlife crisis, chronic pain, or would love to improve performance in their lives and businesses.

You can visit https://www.goodhypnotherapy.org to learn more.

References.

IBS / Gut-Directed Hypnotherapy

Adler EC, Levine EH, Ibarra AN, et al. (2025). Gut-directed hypnotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurogastroenterology & Motility. → https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nmo.70037 Concluded: 12 RCTs, 1,158 adults. GDH improved global IBS symptoms and specifically improved abdominal pain compared with standard IBS interventions.

Goodoory VC, Black CJ, Ford AC, et al. (2024). Effect of brain-gut behavioral treatments on abdominal pain in IBS: systematic review and network meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 167:934–943. → https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016-5085(24)04932-1/fulltext Concluded: 42 RCTs, 5,220 participants. Face-to-face gut-directed hypnotherapy was one of only three treatments with demonstrated efficacy for abdominal pain (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61–0.96) — ranking alongside self-guided CBT and face-to-face multicomponent behavioral therapy.

Anderson EJ, Peters SL, Gibson PR, Halmos EP (2025). Comparison of digitally delivered gut-directed hypnotherapy with an active control for IBS. Am J Gastroenterol 120(2):440–448. → https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38940439/ Concluded: Digital GDH (42 daily sessions) beat a matched active control. 71% achieved ≥30% pain reduction vs 35% in control (p<0.001); quality of life improved twice as much.

Berry SK, et al. (2023). Randomized parallel-group study of digital gut-directed hypnotherapy vs muscle relaxation for IBS. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. → https://www.cghjournal.org/article/S1542-3565(23)00500-1/fulltext Concluded: 378 randomized, 362 treated. 12 weeks of digital GDH improved abdominal pain, stool consistency, and stool frequency across all IBS subtypes.

Pain

Thompson T, Terhune DB, Oram C, et al. (2019). The effectiveness of hypnosis for pain relief: a meta-analysis of 85 controlled experimental trials. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 99:298–310. → https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0149763418304913 Concluded: 85 trials, 3,632 participants. Moderate-to-large effects overall — but highly moderated by suggestibility: ~42% pain reduction in high-suggestible participants, ~29% in moderate, minimal in low.

Milling LS, Valentine KE, LoStimolo LM, Nett AM, McCarley HS (2021). Hypnosis and the alleviation of clinical pain: a comprehensive meta-analysis. IJCEH 69(3):297–322. → https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34038322/ Concluded: First comprehensive meta-analysis of clinical (not lab) pain in ~20 years; medium overall effect. Hypnotizability correlated with outcome at r = .53 — one of the largest moderator effects in the literature.

Langlois P, Perrochon A, David R, et al. (2022). Hypnosis to manage musculoskeletal and neuropathic chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 135:104591. Concluded: Hypnosis reduced chronic musculoskeletal/neuropathic pain intensity; effect stronger in high-suggestibility patients, weaker in low.

Jensen MP, Adachi T, Gertz KJ, et al. (2024). Adjunctive use of hypnosis for clinical pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PAIN Reports 9(1):e1221. Concluded: 70 RCTs, 6,000+ participants. Hypnosis added to other interventions produced a small benefit over usual care; certainty of evidence rated low due to design variability and bias risk.

Yerzhan A, Ayazbekova A, Lavage DR, Chelly JE (2025). The use of medical hypnosis to prevent and treat acute and chronic pain. J Clin Med 14(13):4661. → https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40649035/ Concluded: 12 RCTs (2014–2024). Acute pain reduced by SMD 0.54 (95% CI 0.19–0.90, p=0.0024) vs standard care; oral morphine equivalents 1.5 SD lower in the hypnosis group. Authors caution that the average reduction did not clear the 2-point / 30% clinical-significance threshold — a useful honesty marker to cite.

Medical / Procedural Settings

From Rosendahl 2024: 12 reviews containing 79 distinct RCTs — the single largest evidence block. Effects ranged d = 0.10 to 2.53. Medium-to-large effects for procedural distress and anxiety; largest in the entire literature were children undergoing needle procedures (d = 1.07 to 2.53). Consistently small effects for physiological parameters and recovery time.

Key reviews inside that block: Holler et al. 2021 (50 RCTs, 4,269 patients, surgical adjunct); Tefikow et al. 2013 (34 RCTs); Schnur et al. 2008; Birnie et al. 2018 (Cochrane, pediatric needle procedures).

Hot Flashes / Vasomotor Symptoms

Elkins G, Arring N, Morgan G, et al. (2025). Self-administered hypnosis vs sham hypnosis for hot flashes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Network Open 8(11):e2542537. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.42537 → https://news.web.baylor.edu/news/story/2025/self-guided-hypnosis-significantly-reduces-menopausal-hot-flashes Concluded: 250 postmenopausal women (25% breast cancer survivors), multicenter, sham-controlled (white noise). 6-week self-administered audio hypnosis produced a 53.4% reduction in hot flash frequency/intensity, rising to >60% at 3 months and ~64% in breast cancer survivors. NIH-funded (NCCIH 1R01AT009384).

Elkins GR, Fisher WI, Johnson AK, Carpenter JS, Keith TZ (2013). Clinical hypnosis in the treatment of postmenopausal hot flashes: a randomized controlled trial. Menopause 20(3):291–298. → https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23435026/ Concluded: 187 women, single-blind, vs structured-attention control. Significant reductions in both self-reported and physiologically verified (skin conductance) hot flashes.

North American Menopause Society (2023) nonhormone therapy position statement, Menopause 30:573–590. Concluded: Hypnosis is recommended with Level I evidence (good and consistent scientific evidence) as a nonhormonal treatment for vasomotor symptoms. This is the strongest formal guideline endorsement clinical hypnosis currently holds.

Eugene Berezin