Often the effects of psychiatric drugs are determined by comparisons with a placebo group. You may for example have a result that there were 40% responders to placebo and 50% responders to the drug.
You do seem to have a moral and ethical dilema here. For if you informed each user of a drug about the placebo effect , the percent responders may decrease.
Even though the placebo effect is so large compared to the combined effect you would never hear a doctor talk about this. On the other hand, you would hear a doctor talk about the active substance in the drug and neurotransmitters.
The person is not correctly informed about the treatment he or she is recieving. And on the other hand, this information itself may decrease the benefit to the patient.
What is your opinion?
Is the health of the patient more important than informed information?
2007-03-19
12:58:41
·
2 answers
·
asked by
Appel
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
firstQ: yes: BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY (2 0 0 5), 18 6 , 2 2 2 ^ 2 2 6
Escitalopramin the treatment of social
anxiety disorder
Randomised, placebo-controlled, flexible-dosage study
SIEGFRIED KASPER, DAN J. STEIN, HENRIK LOFT and RICO NIL
(Pacebo =39%). What about if it was "only" 25%?
2007-03-19
13:14:56 ·
update #1
-Why are patients generally not informed about the placebo effect?
2007-03-19
13:17:34 ·
update #2
-Why are patients generally not informed about the placebo effect?
2007-03-19
13:17:38 ·
update #3