3 ms·

> In the end, the placebo response was well below 40 percent and the drug passed easily, but at a much higher cost than it could have. This whole article seems

by TillE 10y ago

> In the end, the placebo response was well below 40 percent and the drug passed easily, but at a much higher cost than it could have. This whole article seems like a lot of self-serving bullshit. A real drug (with real side effects!) absolutely should be expected to perform well above a placebo. If you can't do way better than a purely psychological treatment, your drug is crap.

pessimizer 10y ago
People susceptible to the placebo effect may be limiting approvals of drugs with little to no actual effects.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
sp332 10y ago
Not all placebos are equally effective. The placebo effect seems to be going up in America as studies get bigger and longer. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-addiction/201101/placebo-even-when-you-know-its-fake https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-addiction/201... What if the only ways to get relief were to take an effective pill, or be in an expensive medical test?
fit2rule 10y ago
.. and more to the point perhaps there is something to the statement that "those who insist on using purely pharmaceutical means to treat diseases are holding back research into the power of the mind to heal itself, i.e. the theory that a majority of ills (particularly mental-health) are psychosomatic is being under-explored because there is too much money to be made in selling drugs". I mean, its not a popular opinion, but once the door is opened to start questioning either side of this argument, the sky is the limit.
zzleeper 10y ago
That would be my first thought, but that's not how it works. If 50% of people had placebo and the drug had a real effect on 10%, then: - Placebo results: 50% - Drug results: 50% + 10% * 50% = 55% To detect a difference of 5%, you need way more people than to detect a difference of 10%, so your testing is now costlier and possibly slower. In the extreme, drugs that only benefit a few, or with relatively small but real improvements, will never get tested or fail testing, because of these placebo-folks
white-flame 10y ago
A real drug might really treat some subset of the cases of an issue, if some issue has multiple unknown causes and the drug addresses one of them. If a drug cures 10% of people with an issue, and does not cure 90% of them, is it still worth trying out on people? Is it still worth researching to try to whittle down diagnoses to hone in on those 10% instead of just claiming it to be a failed drug?

by TillE 10y ago

pessimizer 10y ago

People susceptible to the placebo effect may be limiting approvals of drugs with little to no actual effects.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

sp332 10y ago

Not all placebos are equally effective. The placebo effect seems to be going up in America as studies get bigger and longer. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-addiction/201101/placebo-even-when-you-know-its-fake https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-addiction/201... What if the only ways to get relief were to take an effective pill, or be in an expensive medical test?

fit2rule 10y ago

.. and more to the point perhaps there is something to the statement that "those who insist on using purely pharmaceutical means to treat diseases are holding back research into the power of the mind to heal itself, i.e. the theory that a majority of ills (particularly mental-health) are psychosomatic is being under-explored because there is too much money to be made in selling drugs". I mean, its not a popular opinion, but once the door is opened to start questioning either side of this argument, the sky is the limit.

zzleeper 10y ago

That would be my first thought, but that's not how it works. If 50% of people had placebo and the drug had a real effect on 10%, then: - Placebo results: 50% - Drug results: 50% + 10% * 50% = 55% To detect a difference of 5%, you need way more people than to detect a difference of 10%, so your testing is now costlier and possibly slower. In the extreme, drugs that only benefit a few, or with relatively small but real improvements, will never get tested or fail testing, because of these placebo-folks

white-flame 10y ago

A real drug might really treat some subset of the cases of an issue, if some issue has multiple unknown causes and the drug addresses one of them. If a drug cures 10% of people with an issue, and does not cure 90% of them, is it still worth trying out on people? Is it still worth researching to try to whittle down diagnoses to hone in on those 10% instead of just claiming it to be a failed drug?