Makes sense when you think of the very high rate of ‘symptomatic’ people who get tested and are negative. Signal/noise: and ‘placebo’ effects are stronger when it produces ‘side effects’ rather than being inert
back
2 comments
>Signal/noise: and ‘placebo’ effects are stronger when it produces ‘side effects’ rather than being inert
I don't follow. What do you mean? What's the difference between an "effect" and a "side effect"? And what's an "inert" effect?
When it comes to attributing a symptom you're feeling to a cause, the number of correct-negatives in COVID testing indicates a lot of noise (not covid) vs signal (true covid symptom). With placebo effects it's the same problem.
So I mean that when 'active placebos' are used, rather than ones that have no side effect (like dry mouth), the effects are larger. So in basic terms, the more noise there is in the system, the more signal error there is. The main point is about the reason they do blind control studies. People are not very good at correct attribution.
> ‘symptomatic’ people who get tested and are negative.
I don’t follow.
These people likely have one of any number of other illnesses though right? Allergies, common cold, flu, etc?
Yes, I think we all have had symptoms of one thing or another and thought, 'do I need to get tested.' So we have some of the listed symptoms for covid but because those symptoms are so general, most tests turn out negative