SkipCaptcha
212
edits
Changes
no edit summary
"It is well known to medical researchers that merely assuring someone that a treatment will be successful, greatly increases the chance of the treatment actually working" This is the line I could not find a citation for yet. If narrowed to pain management it would be ok. Would a general cite on patient faith affecting outcomes be relevant ? [[User:Markr|Markr]] 16:08, 2 December 2008 (EST)
"It is well known to medical researchers that merely assuring someone that a treatment will be successful, greatly increases the chance of the treatment actually working" This is the line I could not find a citation for yet. If narrowed to pain management it would be ok. Would a general cite on patient faith affecting outcomes be relevant ? [[User:Markr|Markr]] 16:08, 2 December 2008 (EST)
:Not sure this fits exactly, but it speaks to the basic concept. Can you help me restructure the section to reflect this accurately? [http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html] -[[User:DrSandstone|DrSandstone]] 16:21, 2 December 2008 (EST)
:Not sure this fits exactly, but it speaks to the basic concept. Can you help me restructure the section to reflect this accurately? [http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html] -[[User:DrSandstone|DrSandstone]] 16:21, 2 December 2008 (EST)
== "Nonsense" ==
It is not nonsense that a placebo is defined as a substance that has no effect on human beings. The [[''placebo effect'']] is a phenomenon that deserves its own entry, but can be considered separately from the issue of the definition of placebo. Someone who is administered an active agent like epinepherine or insulin will show physiological effects even if they are unaware of the administration; the same is not true for placebos, which cause no physiological changes if the subject is unaware of the administration. To claim that a placebo is not inert because the placebo effect exists ignores the defining characteristic of a placebo.