However, Kadosh (2012) highlights that TDCS is not a ‘magic bullet.’ It requires complex training to be effective, and without regulation, vulnerable groups like students may use DIY devices that could impair cognitive function. More importantly, it raises the ethical issue of equity. If only the wealthy can afford TDCS, we create a ‘cognitive elite,’ widening the societal divide. While some argue caffeine is a comparable, safe enhancer, this is a weak counter-argument: caffeine offers only temporary alertness, whereas TDCS offers targeted, long-term cognitive improvement. Therefore, the ethical risk isn’t just safety, but social inequality. Furthermore, Kadosh’s study had a small sample size of 36 participants, which limits the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, the placebo group received a sham stimulation, but the long-term effects of TDCS remain unclear, raising ethical concerns about sustained use