Cumalift on shark tank
Executive summary
LIFTiD — a consumer transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) headband — appeared on Shark Tank Season 12 seeking investment but left the studio without a deal, after Sharks expressed skepticism about safety and efficacy [1] [2]. Post-show coverage indicates the founders continued marketing the device online despite the Sharks passing, and media outlets have highlighted both scientific uncertainty around tDCS benefits and ongoing commercial activity [1] [2] [3].
1. What pitched on the Tank: an at‑home tDCS headband
Entrepreneurs Ken and Allyson Davidov presented LIFTiD, an electric neurostimulation headband that uses transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and claims to boost energy and reduce caffeine and sugar use; they sought investment on Shark Tank Season 12 [4] [3]. Coverage of the episode describes the device as a consumer tDCS gadget and notes the founders demonstrated it in the studio [1] [3].
2. How the Sharks reacted: skepticism and a pass
Multiple reports say several Sharks tried the device during the pitch while some declined; Mark Cuban ultimately read the instruction manual and, along with other Sharks, passed — LIFTiD left the Tank without an investment offer [1] [2]. Reporters emphasize the Sharks’ concern that the product “may not provide any actual benefits” and that safety caveats were present in its documentation [1].
3. The medical and scientific context reporters cited
Journalists covering the segment framed LIFTiD against broader uncertainty about tDCS: while tDCS is a legitimate research technique under study, available reporting flagged that consumer devices’ benefit claims are disputed and that instruction manuals include health warnings [1] [2]. Green Matters and SlashGear described the technology and explicitly noted that LIFTiD did not secure funding on the show [2] [1].
4. What happened after the episode: continued commercial presence
Even though LIFTiD received no Shark investment, follow‑up pieces and recap sites indicate the company appears to have continued operating and marketing the device online after its appearance [2] [3]. Green Matters wrote that as of its December 2023 article the company still promoted daily 20‑minute use claims; Shark Tank Recap tracked the founders’ on‑air story and subsequent online presence [2] [3].
5. Competing perspectives in coverage
Coverage balances two views: the Sharks and skeptical reporters highlight limited evidence and safety language in the product materials, while recap sites note customer interest and the founders’ persistence in marketing LIFTiD despite no deal [1] [2] [3]. Sources differ in tone: tech/critique outlets stress scientific caution [1] [2]; fan/recap sites emphasize entrepreneurial narrative and post‑TV survival [3].
6. What this means for consumers and investors
Journalists consistently signal caution: consumer neurostimulation devices have mixed evidence, and a lack of on‑air investment plus safety warnings in the manual were red flags for the Sharks [1] [2]. At the same time, media tracking the show note that marketplace outcomes can diverge from TV results — products that leave without deals can still find customers or continue to sell [3] [2].
7. Limitations of the current reporting
Available sources do not provide independent clinical trial data for LIFTiD, post‑show sales figures, regulatory filings, or the founders’ own follow‑up financial disclosures; those facts are not found in current reporting [1] [2] [3]. What is documented is the on‑air pitch, the Sharks’ response, and subsequent media summaries stating the company remained active online [1] [2] [3].
8. Bottom line and recommended next steps for readers
The Tank appearance exposed LIFTiD to public scrutiny and left clear signals of concern from experienced investors about benefits and safety; independent scientific validation and transparent sales/regulatory information are the next things to seek before accepting product claims [1] [2]. If you’re evaluating the product, consult peer‑reviewed studies on tDCS and look for regulatory clearances or credible clinical trials — those specifics are not provided in the cited coverage and should inform purchase or investment decisions [1] [2] [3].