This week I read an article about »placebo« in the famous Swiss Newspaper NZZ www.nzz.ch. This publication really discloses the possible absurdity of a scientific discourse. One might call this discourse »the endless scientific effort to scientifically prove the non-existence of the efficacy in the case of what… so ever substance!« It is given so much concern to the disapproval of everyday evidence. If clinical studies are performed the statistician has to account ca. 30% for the placebo effect, a tremendous amount. Why neglect 30% on the path to well-being?
Isn’t it a waste of time?
There is medication that does not show any effect when given covert. On the other hand, there is amazing efficacy of a so-called placebo which we try so hard to neglect. Studies have and are performed to prove the existence of an placebo-effect. But what does efficacy mean in this case? It means that natural science with its standardized tool box has to be able to measure some parameters known to be related to a specific disease. If scientists don’t succeed to prove the anticipated parameter profile of a disease, then they doubt an effect of the respective substance. Why does this justify the conclusion of inefficacy? What we don’t know, does exist? Is this the weird logic behind?
Studies have been able to prove brain activity!
Placebo initiates brain activity. Here we are, this is straightforward a proof! Couldn’t it be that there are other reasons for this activity? But who cares? Only scientists?
Did nobody consider the fact, that our body follows certain rules, regardless from where the stimuli are sent, mental or physical origin, medicine, food or so-called placebo, the body processes the stimuli always following its own rules. Therefore the stimulus is not that important as we think. it is important that the message is sent and received.
An example at the end of part I on placebos
A selected group of volunteers with knee joint pains were assigned to 3 treatment groups. All of them had to undergo a knee operation. But only 2 of them got an invasive treatment. The knee operation of the third group was a fake, they only received a skin cut. After an observation period of 6 months the group without any invasive therapy showed the best results. They felt perfectly well.
What do think about placebos? Is this term justified at all? Shouldn’t we show more respect to evidence?
