close
more_vert

Merrick wrote:
Squid Tempest wrote:
If it was purely a placebo, why didn't conventional medicine provide a placebo effect? For my friend it was the conventional medicine that had no effect, and for whom homeopathic remedies actually worked.
Sorry to say it again, but that doesn't defy placebo. As Ben Goldacre explains:

"The placebo response is about far more than the pills – it is about the cultural meaning of a treatment, our expectation, and more. So we know that four sugar pills a day will clear up ulcers quicker than two sugar pills, we know that a saltwater injection is a more effective treatment for pain than a sugar pill, we know that green sugar pills are more effective for anxiety than red, and we know that brand packaging on painkillers increases pain relief."

Yeah, I understand that. What I meant was, given that she trusted conventional medicine, and her doctor, why didn't that have a placebo effect?

Obviously i can't know why one worked for her and the other didn't, but among the possibilities I'd say;

- The attention and treatment given by a homeopath are different to that given by a GP. Being told by a trained person that they're treating your whole person, getting an hour's consultation, it's a lot more involving. I suspect this is why a lot of healers practices work.

- The 'conventional' medicines had failed, making her even more desperate to find something that works.

but I don't know exactly why, indeed we can't know - the interplay of body and mind are unfathomably complex, and the placebo effect tells us there's a lot more at work there than we understand. It also tells us - some empty pills working better if they're certain colours, etc - that when you change the details of administering a treatment, you change its effectiveness.