By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
One of the problems with TCM is that its quasi-magical element precludes the use of synthetic alternatives. It's not the substances in rhino horn which are important, so much as the fact it came from a rhino.
One of the problems with TCM is that its quasi-magical element precludes the use of synthetic alternatives. It's not the substances in rhino horn which are important, so much as the fact it came from a rhino.
I think the reason why some ancient medicines (like many strands of Traditional Chinese Medicine) are still in use today is because they work.
I think they work in the same way that homeopathy and many pharmaceutical drugs work.
I think they work because of the placebo effect.
I think the power of the placebo effect is potentially enormous.
I wish a lot more money was being spent on understanding the true potential of the placebo effect and (obviously) our ability to cure many health problems ourselves, often without the need of pseudo-scientific nonsense, witchcraft or pharmaceutical drugs.
EDIT: Interesting (13-minute) piece on the placebo effect here:
I think the reason why some ancient medicines (like many strands of Traditional Chinese Medicine) are still in use today is because they work.
I think they work in the same way that homeopathy and many pharmaceutical drugs work.
I think they work because of the placebo effect.
I think the power of the placebo effect is potentially enormous.
I wish a lot more money was being spent on understanding the true potential of the placebo effect and (obviously) our ability to cure many health problems ourselves, often without the need of pseudo-scientific nonsense, witchcraft or pharmaceutical drugs.
EDIT: Interesting (13-minute) piece on the placebo effect here:
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 10:10]
We've been over this - citing the placebo effect is not the same as saying the treatment works.
The treatment isn't working and any placebo response isn't down to the treatment. You're conflating two different things.
We've been over this - citing the placebo effect is not the same as saying the treatment works.
The treatment isn't working and any placebo response isn't down to the treatment. You're conflating two different things.
SB
What specific treatment are you talking about?
How can you possibly say that any placebo effect is not down to the treatment? That's how the placebo effect works. The patients think that the treatment (whether it's the practitioner's expertise or any chemical substance) is going to make them better, so it does.
How can you possibly say that any placebo effect is not down to the treatment? That's how the placebo effect works. The patients think that the treatment (whether it's the practitioner's expertise or any chemical substance) is going to make them better, so it does.
Any treatment.
It's not how the placebo effect works. You've countered your own point in your post:
"The patients think that the treatment (whether it's the practitioner's expertise or any chemical substance) is going to make them better, so it does."
So what is the treatment doing then? It's doing nothing. It could be water or a sugar pill or anything really because it's not actually working. If it was working you wouldn't need a placebo effect.
Can't you see the difference in what you are saying between the cause and the effect?
How can you possibly say that any placebo effect is not down to the treatment? That's how the placebo effect works. The patients think that the treatment (whether it's the practitioner's expertise or any chemical substance) is going to make them better, so it does.
There's some fringe benefits to had in employing a placebo ALONGSIDE a proper treatment in conditions with a psychosocial element, such as chronic pain, but you won't prevent a stroke by replacing aspirin with a sugar pill.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
It's not how the placebo effect works. You've countered your own point in your post:
"The patients think that the treatment (whether it's the practitioner's expertise or any chemical substance) is going to make them better, so it does."
So what is the treatment doing then? It's doing nothing. It could be water or a sugar pill or anything really because it's not actually working. If it was working you wouldn't need a placebo effect.
Can't you see the difference in what you are saying between the cause and the effect?
SB
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 10:35]
No, what I said is correct.
You are confusing the words "medicine" and "treatment".
I agree that many "medicines" are useless. But them being administered as part of the overall treatment is what activates the placebo effect.
There's some fringe benefits to had in employing a placebo ALONGSIDE a proper treatment in conditions with a psychosocial element, such as chronic pain, but you won't prevent a stroke by replacing aspirin with a sugar pill.
"but you won't prevent a stroke by replacing aspirin with a sugar pill."
"but you won't prevent a stroke by replacing aspirin with a sugar pill."
of course you won't - I never said you could.
You're telling us that huge swathes of medicines in use today are essentially useless. I was wondering which ones you meant. The only category of medication you could possibly apply it to analgesics and maybe some antidepressants in mild depressions, given that pain and mild depression have psychosocial components to them.
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 10:51]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
"But them being administered as part of the overall treatment is what activates the placebo effect."
This is simply wrong - there is no active ingredient in the medicine or treatment which can "activate" the effect.
We aren't arguing against the effect, we are saying the treatments/medicines don't work and don't cause it which is correct.
SB
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 10:49]
Quite. Me giving someone a dose of morphine on it's own won't neccesarily offer an element of placebo, saying 'OK, here's the good stuff' whilst injecting? That might.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Which medicines are being administered as placebos rather than as an actual treatment?
I'm not limiting my comments to placebo "pills". I am talking about the placebo effect in general.
For example there are examples where chronic arthritis pain has been cured as a result of "placebo surgery" - ie, cutting a small hole around the knee and sewing it back up again.
"But them being administered as part of the overall treatment is what activates the placebo effect."
This is simply wrong - there is no active ingredient in the medicine or treatment which can "activate" the effect.
We aren't arguing against the effect, we are saying the treatments/medicines don't work and don't cause it which is correct.
SB
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 10:49]
I know there's no active ingredient.
Let's take rhino horn for example.
Rhino horn medicine sometimes works. Not because of any active ingredient in the horn, but because the patient thinks that there is and it is that which will cure him.
Rhino horn medicine sometimes works. Not because of any active ingredient in the horn, but because the patient thinks that there is and it is that which will cure him.
I know what the placebo effect is.
Exactly.
So we agree that the treatment itself doesn't work and as such surely agree the WHO shouldn't be having any part of it.
I'm not limiting my comments to placebo "pills". I am talking about the placebo effect in general.
For example there are examples where chronic arthritis pain has been cured as a result of "placebo surgery" - ie, cutting a small hole around the knee and sewing it back up again.
It's still not a treatment as such and it would be deeply unethical to pretend that it is. An arthritic knee with a plaster on will still see the joint deteriorate and eventually need surgical correction. What you may get is some temporarily improved psychosocial functioning.
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 11:01]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
You're telling us that huge swathes of medicines in use today are essentially useless. I was wondering which ones you meant. The only category of medication you could possibly apply it to analgesics and maybe some antidepressants in mild depressions, given that pain and mild depression have psychosocial components to them.
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 10:51]
"You're telling us that huge swathes of medicines in use today are essentially useless.=
No, I've said nothing about huge swathes of anything.
I'm saying many pharmaceutical products MAY be working because of the placebo effect. I am also saying more time, effort and money needs to be spent on understanding the placebo effect better.
I am not saying that all pharmaceutical drugs are bad. I'm not even saying that any specific single pharmaceutical drug is bad. I'm saying that I THINK many of them are probably unnecessary because the placebo effect is probably better and safer.
"You're telling us that huge swathes of medicines in use today are essentially useless.=
No, I've said nothing about huge swathes of anything.
I'm saying many pharmaceutical products MAY be working because of the placebo effect. I am also saying more time, effort and money needs to be spent on understanding the placebo effect better.
I am not saying that all pharmaceutical drugs are bad. I'm not even saying that any specific single pharmaceutical drug is bad. I'm saying that I THINK many of them are probably unnecessary because the placebo effect is probably better and safer.
Other than analgesics, antiemetics and antdepressants(in mild depression), which medications are improved by the placebo effect? Very, very few. That's not 'many' medicines, that's a particular subset. You won't pass more urine more because someone has told you furosemide will make you 'piss like a racehorse', you'll piss like a racehorse because of the effect it has on your Loop of Henle, likewise your blood won't thin more because you've been told how great aspirin is at it or recover from an infection because the person injecting says 'this is like bleach for the bloodstream'.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
The treatment that the patient receives is activating the placebo effect.
I've said this all along.
That's a somewhat inaccurate understanding. The effects of the treatment is usually bouyed by the psychosocial gift-wrapping around it. It's why I say, as part of my professional life 'here's a dose of the good stuff'.
These things still WORK - you can see the effects in people(and animals) who are not cognitively able to process the pyschosocial cues and measure an effect by watching behavioural changes.
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 11:33]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
The treatment that the patient receives is activating the placebo effect.
I've said this all along.
It's not what you said:
"I think the reason why some ancient medicines (like many strands of Traditional Chinese Medicine) are still in use today is because they work."
"I think they work in the same way that homeopathy and many pharmaceutical drugs work.
I think they work because of the placebo effect."
They aren't working. The medicines are doing absolutely nothing. The placebo effect which may occur is nothing to do with the medicine but you initially said it was. There should be no cited correlation between something like TCM and the placebo affect.
Rhino horn medicine sometimes works. Not because of any active ingredient in the horn, but because the patient thinks that there is and it is that which will cure him.
I know what the placebo effect is.
There is an argument that you just use anything, dried hamster poo or floor sweepings, and tell the patient it is rhino horn. Should have the same effect assuming they never find out the truth. Something of an ethical dilemma though, lying to patients. So I see the placebo effect, any type of faith healing, as short term and problematic. Once you realise that species are being lost forever then there can be no excuse for bogus cures.
That's a somewhat inaccurate understanding. The effects of the treatment is usually bouyed by the psychosocial gift-wrapping around it. It's why I say, as part of my professional life 'here's a dose of the good stuff'.
These things still WORK - you can see the effects in people(and animals) who are not cognitively able to process the pyschosocial cues and measure an effect by watching behavioural changes.
[Post edited 10 Jun 2019 11:33]
" It's why I say, as part of my professional life 'here's a dose of the good stuff'. "
Precisely, that's part of the placebo effect. And, I should add, good medical practice. Well done.
I don't have an inaccurate understanding of the placebo effect regardless of how many times you say that I have.
" It's why I say, as part of my professional life 'here's a dose of the good stuff'. "
Precisely, that's part of the placebo effect. And, I should add, good medical practice. Well done.
I don't have an inaccurate understanding of the placebo effect regardless of how many times you say that I have.
What I wouldn't do, it be giving something ineffective, which is what you are suggesting that a lot of medications are, though. The effects are legitimate, measurable and objectively quantifiable.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
