Is selling a placebo ethical?

[Publius]

Hypothetical question.

Let's say that I, Mr. John Q. Botique, construct a box with a single audio input and a single audio output, a power input, and a power switch. The input is wired to the output and the power switch and input are left unconnected. The details of the device don't matter - all that matters is that as the designer, I am convinced that the device can only either pass the signal through unaltered, or degrade it.

I then name this box the "Audio Enhancer 4000" and advertise and sell it through various means. I claim that it widens the soundstage and improves detail, and sell it for a certain sum of money that is considered reasonable given the benefits I purport.

Let's now say that from my shop 100 people go to a store wanting to improve their soundstage and detail and buy it. Every single one of them firmly believes it improves the sound of their system, exactly as advertised. Was what I just did ethical?

Extra credit: Now say I gave it away for free. Now how nice of a guy am I?

Let me also state that I am categorically not remarking on any existing audio hardware, and any similarities are completely coincidental. Please, no arguments about whether or not the placebo effect exists or not.

 

[Tuberoller]

answer the poll question and keep this one on topic and in the general forums.Thank you.

 

[Idiot MD]

Ethical conduct generally does not include intentional deception. If one is caught at it their character integrity is compromised as well.

 

[averydonovan]

I'm going to decline to vote on the poll since it doesn't have anything equivalent to what my view is. I think that if the designer does not belief his device produces any positive effects on the sound but markets it as having all sorts of positive effects on the sound then it is unethical. However, if the designer sincerely believes the device he creates as having positive effects on the sound and markets it based on what he believes then it is not unethical, even if the device turns out to be a placebo device. It basically comes down to the intent of the creator and marketer of such a product. To the end consumer the results are the same: a device is marketed as having certain benefits and the device may or may not actually produce those benefits, and there is no real way to ascertain the intent of the creator and marketer just from the marketing.

This is actually the same accross a lot of consumer products. One example, is that I have heard from a few dentists that believe that all toothpaste is the same and really isn't much more than flavor and a breath freshener and the toothbrush is the thing that really matters so long as the toothpaste has flouride. The rather elaborate marketing campaigns by Colgate and Crest would have you believe otherwise and consumers, including myself to a limited extent, believe that different toothpastes can offer different benefits to dental care.

 

[Hirsch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idiot MD Ethical conduct generally does not include intentional deception. If one is caught at it their character integrity is compromised as well.

In many kinds of drug testing, a placebo is used as a control in tests of efficacy of a real drug. Without this, there might be no way to know if a drug worked. This is by necessity an intentional deception. Is it ethical?

 

[Publius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by donovansmith I'm going to decline to vote on the poll since it doesn't have anything equivalent to what my view is. I think that if the designer thinks of his device as strictly a placebo but markets it as having all sorts of positive effects on the sound then it is unethical.

Apologies for getting pedantic on you, but if the designer believes the device is a placebo, then the device must have a positive effect on the sound - in terms of the listeners' perceptions. That's what the placebo effect is all about.

I guess I should add one more clarification: by "placebo" I mean not just "an inert device", but "an inert device which exhibits the placebo effect", which isn't quite the correct definition. I believe that definition is what is implied in the actual poll though.

 

[averydonovan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Publius Apologies for getting pedantic on you, but if the designer believes the device is a placebo, then the device must have a positive effect on the sound - in terms of the listeners' perceptions. That's what the placebo effect is all about. I guess I should add one more clarification: by "placebo" I mean not just "an inert device", but "an inert device which exhibits the placebo effect", which isn't quite the correct definition. I believe that definition is what is implied in the actual poll though.

I mixed up terms a bit in there and you seem to caught what I meant. I'll go back and correct it to clear it up a little.

 

[Feanor]

I voted no, but I must say that we had a hell of a time reading some of these (probably)placebic audio sites (not anything electronic, but quantum tweezers, ect.) with a friend. I rarely get that good a laugh from something on the net. A small part of me is saying : if somebody is *that* stupid, let the guys who make these ingenius hoaxes get their share...

On the other hand, making some actual audio-related product (like that box) one knows is useless/bad and marketing it as good is highly unethical to me. The good thing about forums like this is they cut through that crap.

 

[Idiot MD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hirsch In many kinds of drug testing, a placebo is used as a control in tests of efficacy of a real drug. Without this, there might be no way to know if a drug worked. This is by necessity an intentional deception. Is it ethical?

Please note the "generally" in the first statement, as there are absolutely no absolutes.

However, just because the method is the lesser of two (or many) Evil's doesn't make it no longer an Evil. The ends may be ethical but the ends do not justify the means. We make many compromise in the name of Necessity, but there are those who refuse to do things they deem unethical no matter how beneficial the ends may be, like say, human experimentation.

 

[setmenu]

Of course such a 'device' would probably eventually end up in the hands of
various magazine reviewers [not to mention some well known forums....

] and find itself tested and measured and subject to all
manner of other indignities.
So it would at least need to contain a short length of silver wire or some
other magic ingredient to maintain impetus

Setmenu

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hirsch In many kinds of drug testing, a placebo is used as a control in tests of efficacy of a real drug. Without this, there might be no way to know if a drug worked. This is by necessity an intentional deception. Is it ethical?

Yes, placebos in "testing" are ethical. Placebos for sale for profit are not.

 

[Megaptera]

Whoops -- I voted yes, because I assumed you meant medical placebos. In medicine, yes, in cases where it has a measured positive impact on the patient's health, and your goal is to remove some sort of pain or disease; in cases where all the placebo in the world won't do any good, like gangrene, it's terribly unethical to administer one. If the patient realizes a month later that he got sugar pills, there's a good chance the underlying cause of the pain has already healed itself, with the placebo's help.

In audio, a device which the creator knows to be a placebo is not ethical. I don't care what you say, you're not actually in physical pain because your highs are a little rolled off, and if the purchaser discovers it's a placebo, those highs go right back to crap.

Part of the difference seems to me that in medicine, the patient most often does not want an explanation of the chemical effects of a drug (ie, how it works), so long as they know that it does in fact work -- the doctor says "here, this will make that hip pain go away." In hi-fi audio, we're obsessed with how things work, which is why people with really complicated, exotic descriptions of how their products work ("calls upon the righteous power of Thor to fill out sub-quantum holes in your power with miniature lightning bolts") tend to get people interested.

 

[HiWire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megaptera "calls upon the righteous power of Thor to fill out sub-quantum holes in your power with miniature lightning bolts"

(Reaches for wallet...) Hey, wait a minute...

The level of "pseudo-science" in hi-fi is probably second only to the claims made by the herbal/alternative supplement industry. I voted no, but it's a thorny issue that probably comes down to the manufacturer/vendor's intentions - honest or dishonest.

 

[TrevorNetwork]

I believe it perfectly ethical. What is the difference between "an inert device demonstrating the placebo effect" and a working product with measurable differences? Many products out there produce about the same amount of result as the placebo effect. For example, many products claim, and have been proven to reduce vibration / jitter / optical refractions / pick one. I suspect that many people would hear just about the same net "difference" as a placebo.

 

[Megaptera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrevorNetwork Many products out there produce about the same amount of result as the placebo effect. For example, many products claim, and have been proven to reduce vibration / jitter / optical refractions / pick one.

But if they do actually affect something, they're not a placebo. They may not be effective, practical, or even noticeable, but they do have an actual effect, and people can choose whether or not they personally find it worth spending their money on. With a placebo, the mechanism is often fictional or outright impossible, and the only effect is imaginary -- this might seem like an uninmportant difference, since it's all about how it sounds to the listener anyway, but I think "amount of impact on sound quality" is a seperate issue from "ethics of selling it". A consumer should be able to trust that a product will generally perform consistently with its reputation and its tested results. Placebos have no basis for consistency, and by definition there cannot be a warning saying "this device is a placebo".