

Expensive Placebos Work Better - tshtf
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2015/01/29/expensive_placebos_work_better.php

======
x1798DE
I am very much not convinced of the interpretation of the placebo effect as
"the fact that just thinking that you're getting some treatment of benefit can
have actual benefits." The placebo (and corresponding nocebo) effect is
completely intuitive when you think of it as a measurement artifact. It's
strongest in self-reported outcomes, it goes away or is massively reduced the
better your blinding - all exactly what you'd expect from a combination of
confirmation bias and expectations (both on the part of the person receiving
the treatment and doing the study).

Even to the extent that there are placebo effects in clearly quantifiable
outcomes (e.g. blood pressure, etc) it's _still_ way more plausible that these
are due to nonspecific treatment effects (e.g. taking a pill every day for
your blood pressure reminds you of your problem with blood pressure and so you
take the stairs instead of the elevator or you don't have a second serving of
steak) than that there's a way for your mind to just cause arbitrary positive
or negative effects above and beyond your normal immune system - but only if
it's tricked into it.

~~~
sp332
It's reduced by blinding because both groups think they're getting treatment -
that is, they both get the placebo effect, and the test group _also_ gets the
benefit of the actual treatment.

Edit: It's not really reduced by blinding, it's removed as a variable because
both groups have the placebo effect.

~~~
x1798DE
I suppose the fact that it's reduced by blinding the patient is a wash
(consistent with both theses), but now you need to add _two_ new causes to
explain why single and double blinding work, whereas none of the observed
phenomena are inconsistent with other well-known research biases.

~~~
true_religion
Single blinding spreads the placebo effect to both groups since both groups
think they're getting the treatment.

Double blinding reduces the placebo effect, since the researcher can't imply
to the patient which treatment is actually real and which is placebo since
they don't know.

------
not_that_noob
Extending this a bit further, I think this applies to things like cars or
cosmetics or fashion or wine. Pretty much any consumer good actually.

I remember a study (might be from the Ariely book) where they took wine from
the same bottle, put it into two decanters, and said one was way more
expensive than the other. People were asked their impressions of the two
wines. The more expensive wine received rave reviews while the supposedly
cheaper one was marked only passable.

Interesting on one level, sad on another. And exploitable for profit, as some
smart marketers have been doing for a while.

~~~
melling
Isn't this true for mobile app pricing. I've heard stories where people raised
prices and app sells increased. I found one article that supports this claim:
[http://autosend.io/blog/should-my-app-be-free-or-
paid/](http://autosend.io/blog/should-my-app-be-free-or-paid/)

~~~
mikeash
It applies for computer services as well. You're more likely to be abused by
your clients (blamed for problems unrelated to you, called at odd hours of the
night for no good reason, yelled at, etc.) or fired in favor of somebody else
if you give them your services for cheap or free than if you charge a lot.

------
BtLutz
This idea was covered in Dan Ariely's book "Predictably Irrational". Glad to
see more scientific data backing up the claim.

~~~
ChristianGeek
Loved that book...highly recommended!

------
kristopolous
Speaking of expensive placebos, how is selling oscillococcinum legal? I can't
imagine how many well-intended people mistakenly buy these sugar pills
believing it is efficacious medicine.

~~~
recursive
Well, it can be efficacious, right? I mean, the placebo effect is a real
thing.

~~~
kristopolous
I guess. And if you disclosed what it was on the packaging then it goes away.

~~~
mikeash
It does disclose it, it's just that most people don't know that "homeopathic"
means "this is just water."

~~~
cowsandmilk
Lots of people do know that homeopathic means it is just water. They believe
there is an imprint of the molecule left in the water. Some believe the
imprint works as well as the original molecule. Others believe that imprint is
how the molecule actually works, so getting rid of the molecule is healthier.

Never underestimate pseudoscience.

~~~
kristopolous
I'll tell you how i bought it in 2005. My boss's wife recommended it to me so
i went out and got it. Then my symptoms went away and i thought OK i should do
that again.

I trusted the recommendation and presumed the pharmacy wouldn't be selling
actual sugar pills so I didn't investigate it at first. Then when I saw it
labeled with the homeopaths a year later somewhere else, I looked into it and
was like "oh...".

I think my experience is probably 97% of the stories with or without the
realization. The other 3 percent is like " oh homeopaths, gee isn't this stuff
great? What a wonderful science."

~~~
mikeash
Stuff like this is why I never buy or take any medicine until I know what's in
it and do some brief research to see how it works and what effects it might
have.

------
dmamills
The title could be straight out of The Onion.

------
praeivis
Instagram generation could cure them self just by eating melted money.

~~~
nine_k
How about eating actual gold?
[http://luxurylaunches.com/other_stuff/delafees_chocolate_wit...](http://luxurylaunches.com/other_stuff/delafees_chocolate_with_24_karat_edible_gold_flakes.php)

