Based on your previous posts on this thread, I understand that you are not joking. This just makes you woefully mistaken. Placebos are used in the study of double-blind drug efficacy studies.
In double-blind studies, neither those administering the drugs nor those taking the drugs know whether any subject was given the drug under study or a placebo. The efficacy of the drug is measured by how much better those receiving the drugs do over those who receive placebos. If a drug is only as effective as the placebo, then it is rejected.
The notion that the Placebo Effect is real is an oxymoron. Placebo is the very definition of ineffective.
No.
The placebo effect has long been measured as having the same effect as medicine, both in a positive and negative manner, for a significant proportion of people.
The placebo effect has long been measured as having the same effect as medicine, both in a positive and negative manner, for a significant proportion of people.
Which means that in nearly all such cases the "medicine" isn't actually medicine and fails it's clinical trials.
The placebo effect has long been measured as having the same effect as medicine, both in a positive and negative manner, for a significant proportion of people.
Which means that in nearly all such cases the "medicine" isn't actually medicine and fails it's clinical trials.
The laziness of our trolls is really getting out of hand on AI.
It proves nothing of the sort.
All it proves is that medicine doesn't work for 100% of people, not surprisingly, and that for some people, a placebo can work better. That doesn't mean that that medicine 'isn't actually medicine', nor does it mean that it has failed clinical trials.
We still know so little about how the body and mind react to treatment. The body is amazing at healing itself. We still have no cure for the common cold.
Comments
That's just your feeling.
Better to stick to objective documentary facts.
Based on your previous posts on this thread, I understand that you are not joking. This just makes you woefully mistaken. Placebos are used in the study of double-blind drug efficacy studies.
In double-blind studies, neither those administering the drugs nor those taking the drugs know whether any subject was given the drug under study or a placebo. The efficacy of the drug is measured by how much better those receiving the drugs do over those who receive placebos. If a drug is only as effective as the placebo, then it is rejected.
The notion that the Placebo Effect is real is an oxymoron. Placebo is the very definition of ineffective.
No.
The placebo effect has long been measured as having the same effect as medicine, both in a positive and negative manner, for a significant proportion of people.
Which means that in nearly all such cases the "medicine" isn't actually medicine and fails it's clinical trials.
But mainly why not back up your point with something supportive of your claim that the placebo effect is in fact real? Something as simple as WebMd. http://www.m.webmd.com/pain-management/what-is-the-placebo-effect
The laziness of our trolls is really getting out of hand on AI.
No.
The placebo effect has long been measured as having the same effect as medicine, both in a positive and negative manner, for a significant proportion of people.
Which means that in nearly all such cases the "medicine" isn't actually medicine and fails it's clinical trials.
But mainly why not back up your point with something supportive of your claim that the placebo effect is in fact real? Something as simple as WebMd. http://www.m.webmd.com/pain-management/what-is-the-placebo-effect
The laziness of our trolls is really getting out of hand on AI.
It proves nothing of the sort.
All it proves is that medicine doesn't work for 100% of people, not surprisingly, and that for some people, a placebo can work better. That doesn't mean that that medicine 'isn't actually medicine', nor does it mean that it has failed clinical trials.
We still know so little about how the body and mind react to treatment. The body is amazing at healing itself. We still have no cure for the common cold.
^ If that's true then you'll have no problem with quoting a source. Why do you never do that?