Parkinson's Patients Feel the Placebo Effect

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The placebo effect is notoriously difficult to quantify. But findings announced today in the journal Science may shed light on the mysterious phenomenon. According to the report, researchers at the University of British Columbia have demonstrated that in patients with Parkinson's disease, the placebo effect produces the same results as pharmaceuticals.

Raul de la Fuente-Fernandez and colleagues used positron emission tomography (PET) to study the brains of 12 patients suffering from Parkinson¿s disease while they received treatment. Half of the patients received two courses of injections. During the first round, they didn¿t know whether they were receiving a placebo or an active drug. In the second, however, the patients were told which injection they were receiving. The remaining patients, who had similarly severe symptoms, were tested only in an open manner. The team measured the amount of dopamine released by the brain¿s damaged neurons¿the signature effect of drug treatment on the disease. Intriguingly, patients who received placebo injections exhibited significant dopamine releases. The authors conclude that dopamine release "is linked to expectation of a reward¿ in this case, the anticipation of therapeutic benefit."

The researchers also investigated whether the placebo effect might actually enhance the results of active drug therapy in a synergistic manner. They found, however, that the placebo response does not strengthen the effect of an active drug. In fact, they write, their results "suggest that in some patients, most of the benefit obtained from an active drug might derive from a placebo effect."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe