My question: why do the pharms think this is bad news for them? The placebo effect requires belief that the placebo is fixing the problem. Studies are double-b

My question: why do the pharms think this is bad news for them? The placebo effect requires belief that the placebo is fixing the problem. Studies are double-blind so that the patient does have that belief. Without the expectation of being cured, there is no improvement. For the placebo effect to be a significant influence in general health, the public needs to be convinced that it is receiving a legitimate fix. The best way to show people it's a real cure? Give them a real cure, and tell them all about how it works. The need for chemical compounds that change some aspect of body chemistry will not decrease because of the placebo effect; instead, these compounds become the placebo. It's another, more effective layer of manipulation. But despite my wording, I see no problem with it. It might technically be a giant fraud, if the power of healing lies with the buyer all along. But if it happened in finance, who would complain? "Company convinces clients they have more money; buying power mysteriously increases" doesn't sound all that fraudulent to me. Essentially, it's business as usual for pharms. Develop compounds that may or may not work, tell everyone they work, sell them, produce actual results. What's all the fuss about?