Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Placebos Are Getting More Effective. Drugmakers Are Desperate to Know Why.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Health Donate to DU
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:46 AM
Original message
Placebos Are Getting More Effective. Drugmakers Are Desperate to Know Why.
http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/magazine/17-09/ff_placebo_effect?currentPage=all

Merck was in trouble. In 2002, the pharmaceutical giant was falling behind its rivals in sales. Even worse, patents on five blockbuster drugs were about to expire, which would allow cheaper generics to flood the market. The company hadn't introduced a truly new product in three years, and its stock price was plummeting.

In interviews with the press, Edward Scolnick, Merck's research director, laid out his battle plan to restore the firm to preeminence. Key to his strategy was expanding the company's reach into the antidepressant market, where Merck had lagged while competitors like Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline created some of the best-selling drugs in the world. "To remain dominant in the future," he told Forbes, "we need to dominate the central nervous system."

His plan hinged on the success of an experimental antidepressant codenamed MK-869. Still in clinical trials, it looked like every pharma executive's dream: a new kind of medication that exploited brain chemistry in innovative ways to promote feelings of well-being. The drug tested brilliantly early on, with minimal side effects, and Merck touted its game-changing potential at a meeting of 300 securities analysts.

Behind the scenes, however, MK-869 was starting to unravel. True, many test subjects treated with the medication felt their hopelessness and anxiety lift. But so did nearly the same number who took a placebo, a look-alike pill made of milk sugar or another inert substance given to groups of volunteers in clinical trials to gauge how much more effective the real drug is by comparison. The fact that taking a faux drug can powerfully improve some people's health—the so-called placebo effect—has long been considered an embarrassment to the serious practice of pharmacology.

Ultimately, Merck's foray into the antidepressant market failed. In subsequent tests, MK-869 turned out to be no more effective than a placebo. In the jargon of the industry, the trials crossed the futility boundary.

...........snip........

It's not that the old meds are getting weaker, drug developers say. It's as if the placebo effect is somehow getting stronger.

The fact that an increasing number of medications are unable to beat sugar pills has thrown the industry into crisis. The stakes could hardly be higher. In today's economy, the fate of a long-established company can hang on the outcome of a handful of tests.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
1. some cool science will come of this.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. well, one would hope
But apparently the drug makers aren't exactly open about all this. We all know about the placebo effect, but it was news to me that it is getting stronger, which is pretty fascinating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Actually, we *don't* all know about the placebo effect
Most people know about the pop-culture version of the placebo effect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Schema Thing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
22. exactly.
Edited on Mon Aug-31-09 01:43 PM by Schema Thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
2. Whatever works. There was an episode of M*A*S*H on the placebo effect. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ret5hd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. The science that will come out of this is...
that many of the so-called antidepressants already approved will also be shown to be no more effective than placebos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
5. I think what we need more than anything is a rush to judgment
It's as if the placebo effect is somehow getting stronger.

The key phrase here is "as if."

This article in Wired shouldn't be misconstrued as a ringing endorsement of the placebo effect; it should be taken as a call to review drug trial methodology. The first step should be to review the original trials that made the drugs appear to out-perform placebo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. "endorsement of the placebo effect"
how does one "endorse" the placebo effect? It's like endorsing circulation, or a REM cycle, or such...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Are you kidding me?
Edited on Mon Aug-31-09 11:39 AM by Orrex
The pop-culture version of the placebo effect is endorsed in this very forum all the time.

Every time someone claims that the placebo effect has or imparts some magical healing ability, that's an endorsement. Every time someone argues for use of the placebo effect in place of actual medicine, that's an endorsement.

In this forum the placebo effect is routinely offered up as a surrogate for the "mind's" supposedly miraculous ability to heal the body, inasmuch as the placebo (by definition an inert substance) somehow leads the body to cure itself. Or so the claim goes.


That's how one "endorses" the placebo effect. Were you just testing me, or did you really not comprehend this basic concept?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. No, I'm utterly serious.
Your word "endorse" made no sense to me.

Response to placebo is a simply a physiological response, and a well documented one. It is not particularly controversial.

You seem to be talking about using the reality of the placebo effect to support some kind of mystical power. Whether that's done here frequently, I don't read enough to know.

But talking of "endorsing" the placebo effect seems to imply that there is some controversy over its reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. Ah. I see what you mean.
Yes, I'm addressing the oft-invoked mystical power of the pop-culture version of the placebo effect.

This article is not an endorsement of that magical property, though I predict that it will be taken as such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. Pretty clear you haven't read the entire article. nt
This article in Wired shouldn't be misconstrued as a ringing endorsement of the placebo effect; it should be taken as a call to review drug trial methodology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Pretty clear that I have
I was, in fact, contrasting the celebratory tone of the OP's subject line (the article's headline) and the actual content of the article which was much more reserved.


The first conclusion that anyone should draw is that the original experimental trials of these drugs were somehow flawed. That's a much more reasonable conclusion than to imply that the magical placebo effect might be getting more powerful.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Oh yes of course
Edited on Mon Aug-31-09 12:06 PM by Why Syzygy
All a sudden standard practices for TESTING are failing. :eyes:
Some of these drugs have already been marketed.
Obviously the 'right trial' hasn't been designed yet. :sarcasm:
MUST.design.trial.that.won't.fail.due.to.power.of.mind.

The pharma crisis has also finally brought together the two parallel streams of placebo research—academic and industrial. Pfizer has asked Fabrizio Benedetti to help the company figure out why two of its pain drugs keep failing. Ted Kaptchuk is developing ways to distinguish drug response more clearly from placebo response for another pharma house that he declines to name. Both are exploring innovative trial models that treat the placebo effect as more than just statistical noise competing with the active drug.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
29. Your posts give me less and less faith in the power of mind
Here's what you're doing:


Given:
1. A drug is reported to perform very well against placebo, is approved, and sold.
2. Subsequent testing reveals that the drug now performs less well against placebo.

Therefore:
3. The placebo effect must be getting stronger.

Obviously, that's nonsense. Since the placebo is given as a control because it has no medicinal value, it would be phenomenal indeed if this non-medicine were somehow becoming more powerful. So phenomenal, in fact, that it would require a fundamental rewriting of biology and chemistry; therefore, the evidence in favor of this "more powerful placebo" would have to be much stronger than what we have so far. That doesn't mean it's impossible, but it'll take more than a handful of tests to establish that this phenomenon is real as described.

It is far more reasonable to conclude that something about the original studies was flawed. Why should this be disagreeable to you? You disregard science at every turn when it suits you, but now that you're actually getting to see it in action, you balk. I find that curious.

What's happening here may be an example of the scientific method at its best; a theory is being revised to be made consistent with additional evidence. That's how it's supposed to work, for pity's sake!

However, your failure to understand this basic principle means only that you don't understand how science improves our understanding of the world. You mischaracterize the adaptability of science as a weakness, rather than as its greatest strength.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. Oh please.
I hope you know your rationalizations are pathetic. EOM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Your grasp of science is pathetic
Edited on Mon Aug-31-09 07:20 PM by Orrex
Imagine you're a passenger in a car and a sign is up ahead. Suddenly the sign appears to be moving closer to you. According to your method of thinking, the most probable explanation is that the sign has magically uprooted and started walking toward the car, perhaps via the Power of Mind.

A more reasonable conclusion is that the car has moved forward relative to the sign.


But I guess that's just me rationalizing again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
7. Faith? If you have faith that a drug will work, it works. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. it's called "the power of intent"
And it is totally messing with the results of pharma studies.....

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Right, because how do you measure it? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. More importantly, how do you know when it fails?
Does it fail because you just didn't "intend" strongly enough?


That's why non-falsifiable principles are regarded as unhelpful when seeking to assess the efficacy of a given treatment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. But that's just it, Orrex. IT NEVER FAILS!
The sick person just didn't believe in the magic enough. Woo is all about blaming the victim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. It is just SO OBVIOUS how we need to prove the placebo effect
We need to test it against placebos in double blind trials.

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #19
28. LOL! Well played!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
13. Interesting that this article is focused on anti-depressants.
It might say as much about the nature of our modern ills as it does about anything.

I'd like to see the comparative studies on medicine for measurable physical ailments. (As "feelings of well being" are impossible to objectively measure)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. you must have missed this paragraph
"The upshot is fewer new medicines available to ailing patients and more financial woes for the beleaguered pharmaceutical industry. Last November, a new type of gene therapy for Parkinson's disease, championed by the Michael J. Fox Foundation, was abruptly withdrawn from Phase II trials after unexpectedly tanking against placebo. A stem-cell startup called Osiris Therapeutics got a drubbing on Wall Street in March, when it suspended trials of its pill for Crohn's disease, an intestinal ailment, citing an "unusually high" response to placebo. Two days later, Eli Lilly broke off testing of a much-touted new drug for schizophrenia when volunteers showed double the expected level of placebo response."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alc Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
18. some "diseases" seem made up
Sometimes I see pharma ads and think they just made a disease up to sell their drug, or they are trying to expand the population of people with the disease by convincing people they have it and giving the magic phrase to get doctors to prescribe a drug. I don't know how subjects are picked for the tests, but if the populations are stretched to include people without the real problem then placebos will work.

A recent pharma add is "prevent 'dry eyes' by taking our prescription eye drops 2x a day" (it sounds like 2x/day forever, not for a month then you're cured, but I may be wrong). My guess is that OTC saline 2x a day would do just as well for many people (I assume saline would be the placebo)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. Absolutely not.
Edited on Mon Aug-31-09 01:56 PM by Lisa0825
Dry Eye Syndrome can be cause by several different problems, and the result is a very painful condition. Before I got mine under control (caused by ocular rosacea/blepharitis), I was in pain the entire day for months. I tried a half dozen over the counter drops and 4 prescriptions. I was literally putting drops in my eyes every 20 minutes on my worst days.

Saline does NOT help dy eyes because the dryness is usually due to an imbalance between the oil and wetness in the tears, which allows your tears to both evaporate quickly and results in poor surface tension so the tears just slide right off the eye instead of coating it.

Believe me... when one finds a drop that works for your particular dry eye condition, it is like being rescued.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
24. That's too funny!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
25. It's called positive thinking
and hope. Visualization doesn't just work with sports, it works with healing. A patient with a good attitude heals much faster than one is depressed and fearful, any hospital worker will tell you that. I can't believe this is such a mystery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
26. I'll tell you why.....Commercial TV Pharmaceutical Advertising 24/7.
We have been conditioned to believe that taking a pill will cure anything from The Blues to Getting Old. In fact, we have been conditioned to take pills when we feel good so that we won't feel bad later.

If the Big Lie is repeated often enough, people will believe it.
Ring the Bell...Take a Pill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #26
35. hmmm, interesting idea!!
Pharmaceutical advertising has increased the power of the placebo. Hahahahaha, I think you could be right. Now THAT is the law of unintended consequences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notadmblnd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
27. My thoughts...
Edited on Mon Aug-31-09 02:36 PM by notadmblnd
is that these people aren't sick to begin with. The biggest reason I avoid Drs is because once you go, you are never cured. They keep you running back every couple of months for the office visit ($$ in their pockets) where all they do is take your blood pressure and write a refill for the scripts ($$ to big pharma). When the insurance company will pay for it again, they order tests ($$ to the labs) many of them are often not really needed. So now we have a steady stream of patients running in this circle every couple of months, while often the really sick people are waiting for tests or going without (no $$) and as a result of the huge demand in all three markets, the skyrocketing costs. After all, they all going to charge what the market will bear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mixopterus Donating Member (568 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 06:38 AM
Response to Original message
33. Booga!
Revenge of the Null Hypothesis!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
astral Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
34. The placebo effect just proves
the power of the mind in healing. If we learn that our minds have a powerful effect on our health, we can learn to channel that power and many people will have much less need for pharmaceutical drugs.

I think drugs are fine if they are effective. If they are no more effective than the placebo effect, then the drug just isn't that good. The pharmaceutical industry wants to have a pill for everything and pocket the profits for it all, and they are finding out it just isn't always that simple. They need to have an effective product before they can pocket the profits.

Meanwhile, people are becoming smarter about being in charge of their own health, and educating themselves on the matter rather than just blindly looking to their physician to be their God. (can I say that word "God" here?)

I read a book by Dr. Kenneth Pelletier, many years ago, called "Mind as Healer, Mind as Slayer." Here is a link to him:
http://www.drpelletier.com/sound_mind/

We pretty much can have a lot to do with making ourselves well, OR making ourselves sick / keeping ourselves sick. Simply with the power of our mind.

This is a fascinating moment in history to be alive, while we are learning so much about the true nature of the human condition.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Health Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC