When Mindfulness Became Overpromised

As mindfulness grew in popularity, claims about its benefits grew with it. By the late 2010s, mindfulness was often presented as a universal solution.

A landmark paper published in Perspectives on Psychological Science challenged this narrative and reshaped the field.

Link to the paper: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29016274/

What the Researchers Actually Said

Van Dam and colleagues did not argue against mindfulness. They argued for scientific rigor and realism.

Key conclusions included:

• Mindfulness helps many people, but not everyone
• Effects vary widely across individuals and contexts
• Some popular claims went beyond the available evidence
• Measurement quality and study design matter greatly

This paper raised standards across meditation research.

Why This Is a Strength, Not a Weakness

Acknowledging limits improves mindfulness research and practice.

It shifts the focus from universal promises to better questions:

• Which practice fits which person
• In which situation
• At what intensity

This perspective makes meditation more effective, not less.

Personalization Is the Missing Piece

One of the strongest implicit messages of this paper is that generic mindfulness programs are often insufficient.

People differ in stress levels, attention styles, emotional sensitivity, and daily constraints. Treating everyone the same limits impact.

How intuno Responds to This Insight

intuno was designed with this critique in mind.

• No rigid programs
• No one-size-fits-all sequences
• No assumption that meditation must look the same for everyone

Instead, intuno adapts meditation to:

• Your current activity
• Your emotional state
• Your real-life context

This flexibility allows mindfulness to support life instead of competing with it.