Placebo surgery

[Rhiannon]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/aug/20/when-surgery-is-just-a-stitch-up-placebo-effect

[ekim]

.... and I wonder about the nocebo effect ..... you only have a few weeks to live etc.

[Shaker]

.... and I wonder about the nocebo effect ..... you only have a few weeks to live etc.

This is something I've often pondered, based on the amount of times I've heard of people being given a terminal diagnosis and dying a few weeks or at most a few months later. (I heard of one such case just a few days ago). There's always the whiff of a hint of a suspicion in my mind that without such a diagnosis the person concerned may have lived longer; though of course I realise that this is untestable as you can't run two such cases in parallel, one with a diagnosis and one without.

[Rhiannon]

Purely anecdotal, but in the early 70s my paternal grandmother had surgery for bowel cancer and was given six months to live. My dad requested that she wasn't told of this and she didn't have further treatment, just regular check ups at the hospital for her 'problem'.

She died in 1993.

[Shaker]

Purely anecdotal, but in the early 70s my paternal grandmother had surgery for bowel cancer and was given six months to live. My dad requested that she wasn't told of this and she didn't have further treatment, just regular check ups at the hospital for her 'problem'.

She died in 1993.

Yup, that's the sort of thing I meant.

A few days back I heard of a man whose wife (to whom he was devoted) was diagnosed with cancer and told there was very little more that could be done, and who died a shade under seven weeks later.

What might have happened otherwise, I always think.

[Rhiannon]

Yup, that's the sort of thing I meant.

A few days back I heard of a man whose wife (to whom he was devoted) was diagnosed with cancer and who died a shade under seven weeks later.

What might have happened otherwise, I always think.

And I might be wrong, but I think that I heard somewhere that these days protocol is for patients to be informed of their diagnosis as of right. I don't think relatives are asked first and I'm not aware of it being possible to ask for information to be withheld.

[Shaker]

And I might be wrong, but I think that I heard somewhere that these days protocol is for patients to be informed of their diagnosis as of right. I don't think relatives are asked first and I'm not aware of it being possible to ask for information to be withheld.

I'm a little conflicted here but on the whole I come down on the side of people being given all relevant information. It's their health, their life, so why on earth shouldn't this be the case. The idea of information being given to relatives but not to the person directly concerned, as though they're a small child or mentally enfeebled in some way, sits very ill with me. It's the same sort of patronising high-handedness I'm criticising over on the sex workers thread.

But that still leaves the question: is it possible that death may be hastened in some people if they're given a terminal diagnosis?

[Rhiannon]

I do actually agree - there are very valid reasons why people should be informed as to their prognosis. But I equally agree with my dad that the news would have killed his mother.

Not sure how anyone can conduct an ethical experiment to 'prove' this though.