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 4 days 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 pleaseand Nocebo isI 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 patienthector@lemmy.today 3 days ago
Medical is mostly greek not latin.
shneancy@lemmy.world 4 days ago
the whole point is nothing has occured though, or rather nothing medically solvable
Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 days 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.