“The provider clearly explained that the placebo pill was an inactive (i.e., “inert”) substance like a sugar pill that contained no medication and then explained in an approximately fifteen minute a priori script the following “four discussion points:” 1) the placebo effect is powerful, 2) the body can automatically respond to taking placebo pills like Pavlov’s dogs who salivated when they heard a bell, 3) a positive attitude helps but is not necessary, and 4) taking the pills faithfully is critical. ”

So you tell the patient it is a sugar pill in 30 seconds, then spend 15 minutes convincing him that placebos are really significant and powerful medicine and taking them is critical to them getting benefit, and then you’re shocked that you have a moderate result of benefit? Sounds like some of the people being fooled some of the time to me.