was reading about a normotrovir trial in which the experimental group had fewer side effects than the placebo group
that seems so counter-intuitive - why would that occur and would it happen with any frequency?
also, it has become increasingly challenging to separate legitimate medical personnel/recommendations from the seemingly, but not - especially in our current era of massive disinformation, particularly when it comes to COVID – ### although i did enjoy Dr Stella Immanual’s theory that Coronavirus resulted from having sex with demons### . Can one assume that Paul E. Sax, MD, Prof of Med at Harvard Med is a legitimate source of information? He’s Clinical Director of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School)
I’m not sure what “normotrovir” is, but there is no physiologic reason why this would happen (assuming the placebo was truly inert, and not an “active placebo”). Could simply be random chance with the size of the trial.
Yes, Dr. Sax is excellent and a solid source for information. I have read his column for several years now.
Doctor baraki, could we not chalk up side effects in the placebo group as “the mind is a powerful thing?”
if the mind can create positive changes in health, hence why I assume we test things against a placebo, it seems plausible that the mind can create negative things as well.
However, this would not be an adequate explanation for why they may be reported at a higher frequency in a placebo group compared with an experimental group in a blinded trial. If reported at equivalent rates, sure – we see this in statin trials all the time, for example.