legalmania
Verified Paralegal
It's a fact that placebos have been used in experimental settings for at least 100 years. They have to be used in order to create a control group against which the efficacy of the real drug can be compared.
And yes, scientists have long recognized a "placebo effect," in which patients taking placebos report some improvement. As a rule, however, the improvement reported falls far short of a cure.
There is no evidence and there is nothing in the source you provided that claims placebos have been used entirely instead of actual medicine.
(ETA an exception would be the Tuskegee Experiment, a particularly heinous chapter in American medicine in which African-Americans with syphilis were given nothing but placebos for years so doctors could track the long range progress of the STD. Even there however, the placebos were given to a relatively small control group, not the population (not even the black population) at large. Which in no way excuses the project, but it isn't evidence of planet-wide substitution of placebos for real medicine. If you think about it, it really isn't in Big Pharma's interest to do anything that might suggest widespread use of placebos would suffice.)
So I repeat: how do you form an opinion that flu shots--vaccines that have been around now for decades and in fact attract considerable publicity since they must be adjusted every year and their availability can vary widely--are all mere placebos. On what evidence do you base such an opinion?
The pharmaceutical companies are conducting the experiments, they are getting these medications approved by committing fraud. That's how they are being approved. So the flu shot could have loads of vitamin C and B vitamin and a antibiotic, which is what works anyway.
http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=625176