Are open‐Label Placebos Ethical? Informed Consent and Ethical Equivocations

The doctor‐patient relationship is built on an implicit covenant of trust, yet it was not until the post‐World War Two era that respect for patient autonomy emerged as an article of mainstream medical ethics. Unlike their medical forebears, physicians today are expected to furnish patients with adequate information about diagnoses, prognoses and treatments. Against these dicta there has been ongoing debate over whether placebos pose a threat to patient autonomy. A key premise underlying medical ethics discussion is the notion that the placebo effect necessitates patient deception. Indeed, the American Medical Association guidelines imply that placebo treatment necessary entails a form of deception. As a consequence of this assumption, the fulcrum of debate on the use of placebo treatment has hinged on whether that deception is ever justified. Recently performed experiments with open‐label transparently prescribed placebos have begun to challenge the notion that deception is necessary in eliciting the placebo effect and such effects necessarily involve a binary distinction between autonomy and beneficence. In this article we focus on the content of disclosures in distinctive open‐label, transparently disclosed placebo studies and inquire whether they might be said to invoke deception in clinical contexts, and if so, whether the deception is unethical. We find that open placebos may be said to involve equivocation over how placebos work. However, drawing on surveys of patient attitudes we suggest that this equivocation appears to be acceptable to patients. We conclude that open placebos fulfil current American Medical Association guidelines for placebo use, and propose future research directions for harnessing the placebo effect ethically.     

Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundPlacebos are widely used in clinical practice in spite of ethical restrictions. Whether such use is justified depends in part on the relative benefit of placebos compared to ‘active’ treatments. A direct test for differences between placebo and ‘active’ treatment effects has not been conducted.ObjectivesWe aimed to test for differences between treatment and placebo effects within similar trial populations.ResultsIn trials with continuous outcomes (n = 115) we found no difference between treatment and placebo effects (MD = −0.29, 95% CI −0.62 to 0.05, P = 0.10). In trials with binary outcomes (n = 37) treatments were significantly more effective than placebos (RRR = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.61 to 0.86, P = 0.0003). Treatment and placebo effects were not different in 22 out of 28 predefined subgroup analyses. Of the six subgroups with differences treatments were more effective than placebos in five. However when all criteria for reducing bias were ruled out (continuous outcomes) placebos were more effective than treatments (MD = 1.59, 95% CI = 0.40 to 2.77, P = 0.009).

Conclusions and Implications

Placebos and treatments often have similar effect sizes. Placebos with comparatively powerful effects can benefit patients either alone or as part of a therapeutic regime, and trials involving such placebos must be adequately blinded.     

Placebo medication use in patient care: a survey of medical interns

The use of placebo medication, long recognized by clinicians, often has serious practical implications, such as patient deception. Past evidence has suggested that resident physicians tend to misuse placebo medication. Interns from two consecutive years of a residency program were surveyed anonymously to assess their knowledge and use of placebos. Of the 74 interns surveyed, 44 (59%) were familiar with placebo use in patient care. Fifty percent of these interns familiar with placebo use had learned about placebos from another physician. All interns who had learned about placebos during their internships had learned from another physician, whereas interns who had gained their knowledge of placebos as medical students were as likely to have learned from the medical literature as they were to have learned from a physician (P = 0.027). Interns aware of placebo use were more likely to consider placebo administration for suspected, factitious pain (P = 0.022). The present study uncovered no relationship between interns' estimations of placebo efficacy and the utility they attributed to placebos in assessing a complaint of pain. This suggests that conceptual inconsistencies underlie their use of placebos. Interns often learn of placebos as medical students and are influenced by physician-mentors. Placebo use in patient care is an area of attention for medical educators.     

Is It Always Unethical to Use a Placebo in a Clinical Trial?

Background to the debate: Placebos are used in trials to conceal whether a treatment is being given or not and hence to control for the psychosomatic effects of offering treatment. Placebo-controlled trials are controversial. Critics of such trials argue that if a proven effective therapy exists, a placebo should not be used. But proponents argue that placebo trials are still crucial to prove the efficacy and safety of many treatments.     

The Use of Placebo and Non-Specific Therapies and Their Relation to Basic Professional Attitudes and the Use of Complementary Therapies among German Physicians – A Cross-Sectional Survey

We aimed to investigate the use of placebos (e.g. saline injections) and non-specific treatments (e.g. vitamin supplements in individuals without a relevant deficiency) among physicians working in private practices in Germany, and how such use is associated with the belief in and the use of complementary and alternative treatments, and basic professional attitudes. A four-page questionnaire was sent to nationwide random samples of general practitioners (GP), internists and orthopaedists working in private practices. The response rate was 46% (935 of 2018). 24% of GPs, 44% of internists and 57% of orthopaedists had neither used pure placebos nor non-specific therapies in the previous 12 months. 11% percent of GPs, 12% of internists and 7% of orthopaedists had exclusively used pure placebos; 30%, 33% and 26%, respectively, had exclusively used non-specific therapies; 35%, 12% and 9% had used both. Age, sex and agreement to the statement that physicians should harness placebo effects were not significantly associated with any pattern of use. Exclusive use of pure placebos was associated with being a GP, being an internist, and having unorthodox professional views. In addition to these three factors, a lower use of CAM therapies and a wish for having more time was associated with the exclusive use of non-specific therapies. Among physicians using both pure placebo and non-specific therapies, heterodox views were also somewhat more pronounced. However, associations were particularly strong for being a GP (Odds ratio 11.6 (95%CI 6.41; 21.3)) and having orthodox views (Odds ratio 0.10 (95%CI 0.06; 0.18)) among this group. In conclusion, the use of placebos and non-specific treatments varies strongly between medical specialties and is associated with basic professional attitudes. The findings support the view that the use of placebos and, in particular, of non-specific therapies is primarily a coping behaviour for difficult and uncertain situations.     

Placebo, meaning, and health

Placebos are boon and bane to medical theory and clinical practice. On the one hand, randomized controlled trials employ concealed allocations of placebo to control for effects not due to specific pharmacological mechanisms. As a result, nearly all of evidence-based medicine derives from principles and practices based on placebo. On the other hand, medical researchers and physicians have tended to ignore, minimize, or deride placebos and placebo effects, perhaps due to values emphasizing scientific understanding of mechanistic pathways. We argue that intention, expectation, culture, and meaning are central to placebo-effect phenomena and are substantive determinants of health. We introduce three dualities that are integral to placebo/meaning phenomena: body-mind, subconscious-conscious, and passive-active. These placebo-related dualities should be acknowledged, explored with research, and incorporated in theory. While we view consideration of placebo and meaning effects as essential to any adequate understanding of human health, we feel that lessons from this area of inquiry may already provide practical tools for astute clinicians. Toward this end, we list eight specific clinical actions: speak positively about treatments, provide encouragement, develop trust, provide reassurance, support relationships, respect uniqueness, explore values, and create ceremony. These clinical actions can empower patients to seek greater health and may provide a healthful sense of being cared for.     

Two faces of representation: on the neuroscience of folk psychology

Much work in contemporary philosophy of mind and neurophilosophy hinges on the concept of ‘representation,’ but that concept inherits a problematic ambiguity from neuroscience, where scientists may distinguish between cognitive and physiological levels of representation only tacitly. First, I explicate two potentially distinct senses of representation corresponding to these levels. I then argue that ambiguity about the nature of representation in philosophy of mind is problematic for at least one prominent philosophical project that aims to use neuroscientific work on representation to defend the existence or explanatory relevance of intentional mental states, namely Schroeder’s (2004) scientific explication of desire in terms of the neurobiology of reward. I argue that philosophical treatments of the relationship between cognitive and neural architecture must attend more carefully to the ambiguity in the concept of representation. I conclude by outlining a strategy for addressing the gap between levels of representation, one that privileges a local or narrow philosophical approach to interpreting scientific concepts and data over a global or general approach.     

BRAIN,MIND AND MACHINE: WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS OF DEEP BRAIN STIMULATION FOR PERCEPTIONS OF PERSONAL IDENTITY,AGENCY AND FREE WILL?

Brain implants, such as Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS), which are designed to improve motor, mood and behavioural pathology, present unique challenges to our understanding of identity, agency and free will. This is because these devices can have visible effects on persons' physical and psychological properties yet are essentially undetectable when operating correctly. They can supplement and compensate for one's inherent abilities and faculties when they are compromised by neuropsychiatric disorders. Further, unlike talk therapy or pharmacological treatments, patients need not ‘do’ anything for the treatment to take effect. If one accepts, as we argue here, that brain implants are unique among implantable types of devices, then this can have significant implications for what it means to persist as the same person and be the source of one's thoughts and actions. By examining two of the most common indications for DBS in current use, namely in the motor (Parkinson's Disease) and psychiatric (Major Depression) domains, we further argue that although DBS, as it is currently applied, does not necessarily represent a unique threat to personal identity and agency per se, it introduces an unprecedented ‘third party’ into the debate on these concepts. In this way, DBS can be used as a tool to begin probing, both conceptually and empirically, some of philosophy's most perennial metaphysical questions.     

The relation of emotions to placebo responses

The hypothesis put forth is that expectations of treatment effects reduce negative emotions and thereby reduce symptoms, e.g. pain. Negative emotions increase pain, and it is hypothesized that placebos reduce pain by reducing negative emotions, i.e. feelings of nervousness, fear and anxiety. Placebo analgesia has been shown to be mediated via opioid activity, and relaxation increases opioid activity. The placebo acquires its relaxing effect due to verbal information that pain will be reduced, or due to associations between the placebo and the reduction in pain after effective treatment. Thus, the placebo signals that unpleasantness will be less after administration of the placebo. This involves negative reinforcement which is due to activation of a dopaminergic system that has been found to be activated during placebo analgesia and is involved in positive emotions. The nocebo effect of increased pain is, consistent with this model, because of increased fear and anxiety. The new aspect of the presented model is the hypothesis that expectations reduce negative emotions, and that negative reinforcement that involves the dopaminergic reinforcement system should be a contributor to placebo responses.     

Research ethics and the use of placebo: status of the debate in Canada

The question of the use of the placebo is one of the most controversial in the field of the ethics of research today. The use of the placebo remains the standard practice of biomedical research in spite of the fact that various revisions of the Helsinki Declaration have sought to limit its use. In Canada, the Tri-council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans adopted a very restrictive position with respect to the use of placebos, precisely defining the situations in which its use would meet the demands of ethical research. The positions taken by the various ethical decision-making bodies are, however, hardly shared by regulatory bodies such as the Food and drug administration (FDA), the Council for international organization of medical sciences (CIOMS) or the European agency for the evaluation of medicinal products (EMEA). This divergence of opinions reveals two quite different conceptions of what constitutes the ethical. In the case of decision-making bodies in the ethical field, it is clearly medicine's Hippocratic Oath which explains their reluctance to use placebos. The first responsibility of the doctor is to "do no harm" to his or her patient. This duty is inherent to the medical profession and as such is not grounded in the view of medicine as a contract for care. In the case of regulatory bodies, it is the vision of "medicine as contract" which is in view; and it is this notion that justifies the use of placebos once free and informed consent has been obtained. It is also worth noting that these regulatory bodies make frequent use of arguments based on utilitarian ends. In an unprecedented move, the World medical association published in October 2001 a clarification note about the use of placebos. An analysis of this text raises the question about its real meaning: clarification or concession?     

The placebo response: an attachment strategy that counteracts the effects of stress-related dysfunction

The placebo response represents an enigmatic element of therapeutics. The potency of placebo effects is highlighted by the fact that the current gold standard for determining therapeutic efficacy, the randomized controlled clinical trial, is based on identifying treatment responses that are statistically superior to those elicited by a placebo. Although much has been written concerning the phenomenology of placebos, little is known concerning how they are elicited, although recent research has demonstrated that placebo effects are mediated via objective physiological pathways. I have previously argued that the placebo response is a developmental achievement, rooted in implicit procedural memories that are linked to background affects of well-being evoked by a relational dynamic with a caregiver. This article develops this idea further, suggesting that placebo response represents a nervous-system response aimed at countering the dysphoric effects attributable to chronic stress, and that it is dependent on developmental attachment dynamics. A range of behaviors by caregivers that mimic those achieved during secure attachment are suggested to promote placebo responses.     

Placebo in the treatment of pain

Placebo is the use of the substance or procedure without specific activity for the condition that is trying to be healed. In medicine, benefits of placebo effect are used since 1985 and 1978 placebo effect was first scientifically confirmed. It was found that placebo induced analgesia depends on the release of endogenous opiates in the brain and that the placebo effect can be undone using the opiates antagonist naloxone. Functional magnetic resonance imaging of the brain showed that placebo analgesia was obtained regarding the activation and increased functional relationship between ant. cingulate, prefrontal, orbitofrontal, and insular cortex, nucleus accumlens, amygdala, periaqueduktalne gray matter and spinal cord. Placebo also facilitates descending inhibition of nociceptive reflexes through periacvaeductal gray substance. Placebo effect can be achieved in several ways: by using pharmacological preparations or simulation of operating or other procedures. This phenomenon is associated with perception and expectation of the patient. To achieve the effect of placebo it is essential degree of the suggestions of the person who prescribe a placebo, and the degree of belief of the person receiving the placebo. Expected effect of placebo is to achieve the same effect as the right remedy. Achieved placebo effect depends on the way of presentation. If a substance is presented as harmful, it may cause harmful effects, called 'nocebo" effect. Placebo effect is not equal in all patients, same as the real effect of the drug is not always equal in all patients. Application of placebo in terms of analgesia will cause a positive response in 35% of patients. Almost the same percentage (36%) of patients will respond to treatment with morphine in medium doses (6-8 mg). Therefore, one should remember that response to placebo does not mean that a person simulates the pain and then it is unethical to withhold the correct treatment especially in light of findings that the prefrontal cortex is activated expecting liberation of pain and how this action reduce activities in brain regions responsible for sensation of pain (thalamus, somatosensory cortex and other parts of the cortex). However, the use of placebos is ethically, legally and morally very dubious. The basis for the placebo effect is deception. It undermines honest relationship and trust between doctor and patient which is extremely important for successful treatment. Consciously giving placebos to patients for a condition that can be adequately treated, with prejudice the right of patients to the best care possible, opens up many bioethical issues. Despite all the current knowledge level, placebo effect remains still a scientific mystery.     

The placebo response: its putative role as a functional salutogenic mechanism of the central nervous system

The concept of placebo has evolved over time. Generally believed to be the basis of the premodern pharmacopoeia, the placebo has been adopted in practice as a harmless but unscientific approach towards alleviating symptoms. Currently, many medical scientists view placebos pejoratively as confounding elements in the analysis of randomized control trials.This article examines the changing attitudes towards placebos and the persistent controversies that surround their administration. The possible role of the placebo response as a functional salutogenic brain mechanism is considered, and elements of Edelman's neurobiological model of self and attractor theory are combined to explain how a unitary response by the central nervous system might yield diverse placebo effects. It is concluded that placebo responses are rooted in the complexity of mind/body interactions and that their underlying physiological mechanisms may be elucidated via methods that directly examine brain activity as the basis of subjective experience.     

Placebo analgesia: cognitive influences on therapeutic outcome

The therapeutic response to a drug treatment is a mixture of direct pharmacological action and placebo effect. Therefore, harnessing the positive aspects of the placebo effect and reducing the negative ones could potentially benefit the patient. This article is aimed at providing an overview for clinicians of the importance of contextual psychosocial variables in determining treatment response, and the specific focus is on determinants of the placebo response. A better understanding of the physiological, psychological, and social mechanisms of placebo may aid in predicting which contexts have the greatest potential for inducing positive treatment responses. We examine the evidence for the role of psychological traits, including optimism, pessimism, and the effect of patient expectations on therapeutic outcome. We discuss the importance of the patient-practitioner relationship and how this can be used to enhance the placebo effect, and we consider the ethical challenges of using placebos in clinical practice.     

Placebo analgesia: cognitive influences on therapeutic outcome

The therapeutic response to a drug treatment is a mixture of direct pharmacological action and placebo effect. Therefore, harnessing the positive aspects of the placebo effect and reducing the negative ones could potentially benefit the patient. This article is aimed at providing an overview for clinicians of the importance of contextual psychosocial variables in determining treatment response, and the specific focus is on determinants of the placebo response. A better understanding of the physiological, psychological, and social mechanisms of placebo may aid in predicting which contexts have the greatest potential for inducing positive treatment responses. We examine the evidence for the role of psychological traits, including optimism, pessimism, and the effect of patient expectations on therapeutic outcome. We discuss the importance of the patient-practitioner relationship and how this can be used to enhance the placebo effect, and we consider the ethical challenges of using placebos in clinical practice.     

Are All Placebo Effects Equal? Placebo Pills,Sham Acupuncture,Cue Conditioning and Their Association

Placebo treatments and healing rituals have been used to treat pain throughout history. The present within-subject crossover study examines the variability in individual responses to placebo treatment with verbal suggestion and visual cue conditioning by investigating whether responses to different types of placebo treatment, as well as conditioning responses, correlate with one another. Secondarily, this study also examines whether responses to sham acupuncture correlate with responses to genuine acupuncture. Healthy subjects were recruited to participate in two sequential experiments. Experiment one is a five-session crossover study. In each session, subjects received one of four treatments: placebo pills (described as Tylenol), sham acupuncture, genuine acupuncture, or no treatment rest control condition. Before and after each treatment, paired with a verbal suggestion of positive effect, each subject''s pain threshold, pain tolerance, and pain ratings to calibrated heat pain were measured. At least 14 days after completing experiment one, all subjects were invited to participate in experiment two, during which their analgesic responses to conditioned visual cues were tested. Forty-eight healthy subjects completed experiment one, and 45 completed experiment two. The results showed significantly different effects of genuine acupuncture, placebo pill and rest control on pain threshold. There was no significant association between placebo pills, sham acupuncture and cue conditioning effects, indicating that individuals may respond to unique healing rituals in different ways. This outcome suggests that placebo response may be a complex behavioral phenomenon that has properties that comprise a state, rather than a trait characteristic. This could explain the difficulty of detecting a signature for “placebo responders.” However, a significant association was found between the genuine and sham acupuncture treatments, implying that the non-specific effects of acupuncture may contribute to the analgesic effect observed in genuine acupuncture analgesia.     

Different Placebos,Different Mechanisms,Different Outcomes: Lessons for Clinical Trials

Clinical trials use placebos with the assumption that they are inert, thus all placebos are considered to be equal. Here we show that this assumption is wrong and that different placebo procedures are associated to different therapeutic rituals which, in turn, trigger different mechanisms and produce different therapeutic outcomes. We studied high altitude, or hypobaric hypoxia, headache, in which two different placebos were administered. The first was placebo oxygen inhaled through a mask, whereas the second was placebo aspirin swallowed with a pill. Both placebos were given after a conditioning procedure, whereby either real oxygen or real aspirin was administered for three consecutive sessions to reduce headache pain. We found that after real oxygen conditioning, placebo oxygen induced pain relief along with a reduction in ventilation, blood alkalosis and salivary prostaglandin (PG)E2, yet without any increase in blood oxygen saturation (SO2). By contrast, after real aspirin conditioning, placebo aspirin induced pain relief through the inhibition of all the products of cyclooxygenase, that is, PGD2, PGE2, PGF2, PGI2, thromboxane (TX)A2, without affecting ventilation and blood alkalosis. Therefore, two different placebos, associated to two different therapeutic rituals, used two different pathways to reduce headache pain. The analgesic effect following placebo oxygen was superior to placebo aspirin. These findings show that different placebos may use different mechanisms to reduce high altitude headache, depending on the therapeutic ritual and the route of administration. In clinical trials, placebos and outcome measures should be selected very carefully in order not to incur in wrong interpretations.     

Pollution and Intimacy in a Transcendent Ethics of Care: A Case of Aged-care in India

In India, where children’s care of ageing parents is seen as practical and sacred, animated by notions of seva (selfless service), the outsourcing of elder care causes considerable concern. Meanwhile, carers’ work in old-age homes is treated as transactional, and their moral claims about this work are either overlooked or criticised. While gendered, socio-economic circumstances compel the women we discuss in this paper to care-work at an old-age home in Pune, they also understood this work as a register for the spiritual striving normally reserved for higher classes and castes. Accordingly, notions of polluting and non-polluting bodily waste inform the sense of kin-like intimacy through which they frame their labour. Attending to the institutional, spiritual, emotional and bodily registers of these carers’ work, we argue for a transcendent ethics of care, a conceptualisation that contributes to broader understandings of marginalisation and moral imagination in an ordinary ethics of care.     

The animal sensorimotor organization: a challenge for the environmental complexity thesis

Godfrey-Smith’s environmental complexity thesis (ECT) is most often applied to multicellular animals and the complexity of their macroscopic environments to explain how cognition evolved. We think that the ECT may be less suited to explain the origins of the animal bodily organization, including this organization’s potentiality for dealing with complex macroscopic environments. We argue that acquiring the fundamental sensorimotor features of the animal body may be better explained as a consequence of dealing with internal bodily—rather than environmental complexity. To press and elucidate this option, we develop the notion of an animal sensorimotor organization (ASMO) that derives from an internal coordination account for the evolution of early nervous systems. The ASMO notion is a reply to the question how a collection of single cells can become integrated such that the resulting multicellular organization becomes sensitive to and can manipulate macroscopic features of both the animal body and its environment. In this account, epithelial contractile tissues play the central role in the organization behind complex animal bodies. In this paper, we relate the ASMO concept to recent work on epithelia, which provides empirical evidence that supports central assumptions behind the ASMO notion. Second, we discuss to what extent the notion applies to basic animal architectures, exemplified by sponges and jellyfish. We conclude that the features exhibited by the ASMO are plausibly explained by internal constraints acting on and within this multicellular organization, providing a challenge for the role the ECT plays in this context.     

Reproductive performance of dairy cows following treatment with fenprostalene, dinoprost, or cloprostenol between 24 and 31 Days post partum: a field trial

Three hundred and one Holstein cows (n=301), calving at a commercial free-stall dairy farm, were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 prostaglandin treatment groups or a placebo group. The placebos were packaged 3 ways to mimic the 3 commercial prostaglandin preparations. Group 1 received 1 mg fenprostalene and 1.6 mg oxytetracycline; Group 2 received the fenprostalene placebo (2 ml polyethylene glycol and 1.6 mg oxytetracycline); while Group 3 was given 25 mg dinoprost. Group 4, the dinoprost placebo received 5 ml saline; Group 5 received 500 ug cloprostenol; and Group 6 the cloprostenol placebo received 2 ml saline. The treatments were administered between Days 24 and 31 post partum. Double blind techniques were used in administering treatments and in assessing the response to treatment. There were no significant differences among treatment groups with respect to incidence of retained fetal membranes, endometritis, pyometra, anestrus, number of services per pregnancy, calving-to-first estrus interval, services per conception, number of prostaglandin treatments other than those administered between Days 24 and 31 post partum, the percentage culled for reproductive reasons and all factors combined. Cows receiving fenprostalene, dinoprost or cloprostenol had a decreased calving-to-conception interval compared with that of the controls (P = 0.05). It is concluded that, in the herd studied, treatment with any of the 3 commercially available prostaglandin products between Days 24 and 31 post partum was beneficial for reproductive performance.