• shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      17 hours ago

      deeply meaningless rant:

      why do we need two words for placebo effect when it’s just positive placebo and negative placebo, i know i know, the word placebo has an ingrained positive aspect in its root… but it’s not like the english language ever gives a fuck about the roots of a word, it bastardises all words equally! why make an exception now?? why not just call it negative placebo!

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 hours ago

        It’s not about positive/negative. Those have specific meanings in research, and it’s not “good vs. bad” like in colloquial speech.

        Placebo/nocebo are both positives, but the difference is about whether the imagined effect is beneficial or adverse. Imagining a beneficial effect is a positive, and imagining an adverse effect is also a positive.

        “Negative” would imply they’re imagining that something isn’t there. For instance, if clinicians could verify that a physiological change took place, but due to the subject’s expectations they don’t notice any change in symptoms. Like, “I thought it was a placebo so I don’t feel any better.” I don’t think there’s a word for that because it’s not typically how trials are designed.

      • woofenator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        15 hours ago

        It’s because Placebo and Nocebo are not meant for english, but for clear medical communication, same reason Latin is used in the medical field, instead of plain English/Spanish/Canadian/etc. Both words are Latin, Placebo is I shall please and Nocebo is I will harm, and a doctor looking at those two words will, without a shadow of a doubt, know what has occured, if anything, to a patient

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            No, the whole point is things occurred, but were not caused by a drug, but by the brain. It’s still equally as valid.