The Dynamic Neural Retraining System (DNRS) is a self-directed course for people with chronic illness. It teaches a daily mental routine, practiced for months, meant to interrupt what the program calls a stuck threat response in the brain. It is marketed for myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, fibromyalgia, and long COVID. In many of these conditions the nervous system amplifies pain, fatigue, and sensitivity, a process called central sensitization. Behavioral and psychological approaches help some people. No controlled trial has tested DNRS itself.
The closest controlled evidence comes from related therapies. One: a small randomized trial of amygdala retraining in fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue. Two: a larger trial of a brain-based pain therapy in chronic back pain. The symptoms it treats are physical illnesses. The main worry is marketing that suggests it reverses organic disease.
Findings & Outcomes
What It Is
The Dynamic Neural Retraining System is a self-directed course that Annie Hopper created, sold as an online video program with a workbook for people with long-running chronic illness. It is also marketed for mold illness and for food and chemical intolerances. The course runs about 14 hours of instruction, followed by a daily practice the program asks people to keep up for at least six months. The online version costs a few hundred dollars, with optional in-person and coaching add-ons that cost more.
How It Works
DNRS builds on one idea: in these conditions the limbic system, the brain's threat circuitry, stays over-activated, and DNRS holds that this over-activation sustains the symptoms.
In fibromyalgia and related conditions the spinal cord and brain amplify incoming signals, so ordinary input can register as pain, and the thresholds for fatigue, nausea, and sensitivity fall. That amplification is measured and physical. It is part of why the symptoms count as real illness.
Next is the conditioned response. The body learns associations, so a smell, food, or place that once came with feeling ill can begin to trigger symptoms on its own. This is the same learning that sits under many anxiety responses.
The third claim is the unconfirmed one: that a rehearsed daily routine, through neuroplasticity, retrains the limbic system out of the illness. The program says people recover from conditions like ME and MCS this way. Naming central sensitization and the conditioned response explains why an approach might help, though it does not make the illness psychological. A person can carry a sensitized nervous system and an organic disease at the same time.
What the Program Asks of You
Anatomy of the Practice
1The course
The person watches about fourteen hours of video and learns the model and the daily routine. The program teaches that these symptoms come from a conditioned brain response, and it makes that reframing central to the method.
2The daily practice
The person runs the routine several times a day, and whenever a symptom or stressful thought starts. They stop, step through a short sequence of movements and visualizations, and rehearse calm, positive statements. The program asks for a firm commitment, often an hour or more a day, kept up without long gaps.
3Over months
Many who finish report improvement. But the people who sustain a demanding daily practice differ from those who start it, and these illnesses rise and fall on their own. Reported improvement is not proof the practice caused it. The program describes recovery as gradual and uneven.
What the Evidence Shows
The strongest controlled test of the idea used a different program in a different condition. A randomized trial gave pain reprocessing therapy to 151 adults with chronic back pain, teaching them to treat pain as a safe brain signal. At four weeks, 66% were pain-free or nearly so, against 20% on an open-label placebo injection and 10% on usual care. Back pain differs from the fatigue and sensitivity DNRS targets. The trial shows a brain-based approach can lower chronic primary pain, but only for pain. Brain-based approaches to central sensitization are an active research area, and what is tested in chronic back pain today may reach these conditions next.
Closer to DNRS is a single-blind randomized trial that added amygdala retraining to standard care for people with fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue. Those who received it reported better physical health, energy, pain, symptom distress, and fatigue than the standard-care group. The result is fragile: of 44 people randomized, only 21 finished, and just 7 completed the retraining arm.
DNRS itself has never been tested in a controlled trial. The strongest published study of a comparable program, amygdala and insula retraining, reported that participants rated their health higher after three or more months across most conditions studied. It had no control group.
The data were self-reported from a small, self-selected sample, and the author was a paid consultant to the program. Most of the remaining support is testimonial, published by the programs themselves.
The Research & Studies
Everything here is based on the research we have collected and checked, sorted into groups and ordered with the strongest evidence first. Click any claim to open the studies behind it.
How it works
Chronic pain and related conditions involve nervous-system amplification (central sensitization)
In conditions like fibromyalgia, the nervous system turns up the volume on pain and other signals. The symptoms are physical, and this amplification is a recognized mechanism, not something people imagine.
In many chronic pain and functional conditions, including fibromyalgia, the central nervous system amplifies pain and other sensory signals, not simply reporting ongoing tissue damage, a process termed central sensitization or nociplastic pain. It is a recognized mechanism and part of why the symptoms are physical. Measured in: Adults with chronic pain conditions, synthesized in a general medical review of chronic pain. Central sensitization explains part of these conditions and does not make them psychological or reversible by thought. It is a rationale for why a nervous-system approach might help, not evidence that any particular program does.
The study · 1
Cohen et al., chronic pain, an update on burden, best practices, and new advances · Lancet 2021;397(10289):2082-2097
Pain
A brain-based pain therapy left two-thirds of chronic back pain patients pain-free, versus a fifth on placebo
In one trial, a brain-based therapy that reframes pain as a false alarm left two-thirds of chronic back pain patients pain-free, against a fifth given a placebo. This is a different program from DNRS, tested in a different condition.
In a randomized trial of 151 adults with chronic back pain, pain reprocessing therapy, which teaches patients to reappraise pain as a non-dangerous brain signal, left 66% (33 of 50) pain-free or nearly pain-free at four weeks, versus 20% (10 of 51) on an open-label placebo injection and 10% (5 of 50) on usual care. Mean pain fell to 1.18 of 10 with the therapy, versus 2.84 on placebo and 3.13 on usual care, and the gains held at one year. Measured in: 151 adults with primary chronic back pain, 54% female, mean age 41, in a university research setting. This tested pain reprocessing therapy, not DNRS, and in chronic back pain, not the fatigue and sensitivity conditions DNRS targets. It is indirect support that a brain-based approach can reduce chronic primary pain, not a test of DNRS. Single trial, self-selected community sample motivated to try a psychological treatment.
The study · 1
Ashar et al., effect of pain reprocessing therapy vs placebo and usual care for patients with chronic back pain, a randomized clinical trial · JAMA Psychiatry 2022;79(1):13-23
Energy And Fatigue
A small randomized trial of a related brain-retraining program improved fibromyalgia and chronic-fatigue symptoms, but few finished
A small trial of a brain-retraining program, added to standard care, improved self-reported energy, pain, and fatigue in people with fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue. Only 7 people finished the retraining arm, so the result is fragile.
In a single-blind randomized trial, amygdala retraining (an existing brain-retraining program) added to a 1.5-day multidisciplinary course improved self-reported physical health, energy, pain, symptom distress, and fatigue compared with standard care alone in fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue. Of 44 people randomized, 21 completed the study, with 7 in the retraining arm. Measured in: 44 patients with fibromyalgia and/or chronic fatigue randomized (21 completed), median age 48, 91% women, in a tertiary-care clinic. Very high dropout, with only 7 of 22 completing the retraining arm, plus self-reported outcomes and an unblinded intervention, make this a preliminary signal. It tested amygdala retraining, a related program, not DNRS.
The study · 1
Toussaint et al., a mind-body technique for symptoms related to fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue · Explore (NY) 2012;8(2):92-98
Evidence And Methods
The published support for programs like DNRS is uncontrolled and self-reported; no trial has tested DNRS itself
The best study of a similar brain-retraining course found people said they felt better afterward, but there was no comparison group, the data were self-reported, and the author was paid by the program. No controlled trial has tested DNRS itself.
The strongest published study of a comparable brain-retraining program (amygdala and insula retraining, the Gupta Program) found participants rated their health and functioning higher after three or more months across 14 of 16 chronic conditions. It had no control group, used self-reported data from a small self-selected sample, and was authored by a paid consultant to the program. No randomized controlled trial has tested the Dynamic Neural Retraining System itself. Measured in: Self-selected users of a brain-retraining program reporting on their own health across multiple chronic conditions, cross-sectional survey. What could explain it instead: With no control group, the reported gains cannot be separated from the natural rise and fall of fluctuating illness (regression to the mean), the expectation set by a program people chose and paid for, and the greater tendency of those who improved to complete a follow-up survey. The author's financial tie to the program is a further source of bias.. A before-and-after survey of people who chose and paid for a program cannot show the program caused the change. It reflects what proponents cite, and no controlled trial has tested DNRS.
The study · 1
Bratty, neuroplasticity intervention, amygdala and insula retraining (AIR), significantly improves overall health and functioning across various chronic conditions · Integr Med (Encinitas) 2023;22(6):20-28
How to Try It
Ways to Do It
Three ideas sit under DNRS: calming a sensitized nervous system, working with conditioned responses, and pacing activity. All three can be practiced for free, and they carry the most support behind them. The paid course packages them into a structured program with a fixed routine and coaching. Keep any of this alongside your medical care.
A daily calming practice such as meditation or slow breathing. Gentle pacing. And noticing what sets off your symptoms, without forcing yourself through them.
Books on chronic pain, central sensitization, and pain science, plus low-cost meditation or nervous-system apps, cover much of the same ground the courses teach.
DNRS and comparable programs sell a set curriculum, a fixed daily routine, and coaching. What they package is structure and support.
Whatever the source, these approaches all ask for a calming, pacing practice held steadily. Two routes reach it, at opposite ends of cost and effort.
Assemble your own: a daily meditation or breathing practice, careful pacing, and a clinician working up and treating the underlying illness. It takes self-direction to build and sustain.
Buy a structured course for the curriculum and the coaching. Someone else built the routine, so it is easier to follow.
Go Deeper
- Anxiety: the same conditioned threat response drives anxiety, where behavioral treatment has a much larger evidence base.
- Meditation: the calming, attention-training practice at the base of most brain-retraining routines, free and studied on its own.
The Chinese Medicine View
Chinese medicine reads long-running fatigue and sensitivity through several patterns. Exhaustion out of proportion to effort, poor digestion, and heaviness point to Spleen Qi deficiency, the failure to turn food into usable Qi. A deeper depletion, with cold, low reserves, and a long course, points to Kidney deficiency and the draining of Essence. The tension, irritability, and symptoms that come and go with stress belong to Liver Qi stagnation. Disturbed sleep and a mind that will not settle are read as the Shen, the spirit housed by the Heart, being unsettled.
The tradition treats mind and body as one system. A practice that calms the Shen and eases Liver Qi stagnation is held to calm the body as well, and calming practices have long been part of Chinese medicine. The tradition would not read that as retraining a brain out of an illness. It would treat the deficiency underneath. The classical caution 勞則氣耗, exertion consumes Qi, points to rest and tonifying the deficiency in someone whose reserves are low.
Two cautions follow, and a Five Branches practitioner would raise them:
- A mind-calming practice does not replace treating the constitutional deficiency, and on its own it can leave the root untouched.
- The tradition does not read the body's signals as errors to override. Nausea from a chemical, or a crash after exertion, is information about a person's state, and the pattern behind it still needs care.
If you work with a practitioner, the pattern is worth asking about, because the treatment depends on it and differs from person to person.
Cautions For This Practice
Extra restraintEverything to be aware of is here, in one place. This practice suits most healthy people; a few situations call for real care.
Keep medical care going; this does not replace a diagnosis
Myalgic encephalomyelitis, multiple chemical sensitivity, fibromyalgia, and long COVID are physical illnesses, and they can occur alongside conditions that need to be found and treated. A brain-retraining course is not a substitute for a medical workup. Do not stop a treatment, drop an investigation, or leave a new or changing symptom unexamined because a program frames the illness as a brain response.
Be wary of marketing that promises recovery or blames setbacks on you
No trial has shown DNRS reverses these conditions. Be wary of any program that guarantees recovery, or treats a relapse as proof you practiced wrong. That blames the patient and adds guilt to an already hard illness. Reported improvement also reflects the expectation people bring to a program they chose and paid for.
In ME/CFS, do not push through symptoms
Post-exertional malaise, a worsening after even small exertion, is a defining feature of ME/CFS, and pushing through it can cause lasting setbacks. Treat any encouragement to override fatigue or ramp activity on a schedule with care. Pace to stay under the level that triggers a crash.
Start slow, be smart, read the research, and consult a professional if you have any concerns. This is here to inform your choice, not make it for you.
Common Questions
Does this mean my symptoms are imaginary?
No. These are physical illnesses. That a brain-directed approach is being studied does not put the problem in your imagination.
Is DNRS the same as the Gupta Program?
They are near-identical products. Both sell a set curriculum, a fixed daily routine, and coaching, for the same chronic conditions. The choice comes down to format, cost, and fit.
Is it safe to try?
The practice itself, calming routines and mental rehearsal, carries little physical risk for most people. The real risk is stopping medical care or pushing through fatigue in ME/CFS.
Explore Related
Other pages this one connects to, by the evidence they share, the outcomes they touch, and the ground they cover.
All 4 sources on this page independently checked and cross-referenced.
Thomas Dehli, Founder & Editor, Sacred Lotus
Sacred Lotus has published Chinese medicine reference material since 2001. Integrative pages are held to the same standard as the herb and formula library: cite the source, grade the claim at its real strength, and say where the research has not looked. This page is educational and it is not medical advice. Last reviewed and updated August 10, 2026.
Evidence strength
How confidently the research supports a claim. Strength describes the evidence, not our endorsement.