If the placebo is such a big deal, why is it not being diligently studied? Why is the ‘cause’ of the placebo ‘effect’ not being looked for? If this is such a huge factor that it governs all drug studies, surely it deserves some attention in its own right.
Years ago an event occurred in Los Angeles that every resident at the time surely remembers. An elderly man plowed through an open-air market in Santa Monica for which a street had been dedicated. There had been no evasive maneuvers, and the man may even have accelerated the vehicle during the encounter. Quite a number of people were killed or injured.
Patty Duke as Neely O’Hara in the 1967 film ‘‘Valley of the Dolls.’’ Credit 20th Century Fox
The death of Patty Duke places the challenge of Bipolar Disorder front and center. In her case, it was not diagnosed for many years, which is not atypical. Her turbulent life even after it was diagnosed testifies to the fact that the condition was not under good control.
In the previous newsletter on this topic we supported the case for cognitive skills training as a sister technology to neurofeedback, and we disparaged the case that the FTC has been making against Lumosity in particular. But how does cognitive skills training actually stack up against neurofeedback? This is a useful discussion to be had.
Science Magazine has just weighed in on the recent sanctioning of Lumosity by the Federal Trade Commission for ostensible over-claiming.(Reference) From our perspective we regard cognitive skills training as a kindred technology to neurofeedback. It’s yet another computer-based method of enhancing brain function. So where do we come down on the issue of the FTC sanction? We come down firmly on both sides of the issue! On the one hand, over-claiming by any of the major players ends up casting a pall on the entire field. And on the other, the FTC may well have exhibited entirely too much regulatory zeal. The review in Science sheds light on the controversy. Read More »