Elaboration 4.1

I should not withold from the reader (the reader of these elaborations), something more about the placebo-effect. The name, like most pseudological terms, is not very appropriate, meaning something like: 'I will please you'. In fact, it remains pure ideation, i.e. auto-suggestion. This latter term, in its turn, may look somewhat deficient to the casual reader, since the drug is administered by others, therefore hetero-. In reality, there 'is' no drug at all, and the mechanism, like all ideation, is strictly auto-. Between auto-, and hetero-, stands the unavoidable barrier of physics (the physical medium). Or is it, as the parapseudologists and mystics believe, possible that: 'one can 'think' somebody else better (or worse) '? There is absolutely no evidence for that (praise be). One can only 'talk' somebody else better or painless, or even dead, the thinking he does himself and this is the ONLY agent that causes the effect. Scientifically (!!), it has been named ADT. (for 'any damned thing'), orG.O.K. (god only knows), according to Orton, and it shows the swindleric attitude of doctors who use it. They prescribe mixtures of 'aqua sequana, aqua bi-destillata, illa repetita, eadem, oxydised hydrogenium, natrium chloride, etc.', all the while KNOWING what they are doing. Placebo, now, is not so much striking by its unashamed exposure of (professional) trickery, it is far more striking in the casual way it is noted and published in medicine, though not studied at all. This would, of course necessitate a study in ideation. Every scientist worth his salt would immediately grasp the paramount importance of studying placebo (ideation theory, mind-science) when told that people get cured of the most serious complaints by the mere fact that they 'think' they have a powerful drug, which in reality is not different from the daily intake of food. All the efforts and time-waste by all workers who study and investigate rats, flamingo's, worms, pigeons, even bacteria and virusses, fall into insignificance, when compared to one man (like L.) who investigates mind (placebo, indoctrination, suggestion, etc.). This is obvious, because everything they can conclude for 'humans', reasoned fromout animals, MUST be dominated by an unstudied, unknown, very powerful effect. Quite unique; must the total lack of fixed-path thinking seem here. It is after all a more or less fixed rule to study the most important and least known first. With the placebo effect this is not done. But, another fixed-path has taken precedence, the one that says: 'we study physics and therefore let's leave the un-physics alone'. But I must show the reader the utter hilarity of the officially approved placebo-effect. It is found in Meyler's 'Side Effects of Drugs', volume VIII (!) (1100 pages!) (Dukes M. N. G. (1975) Amsterdam: Exerpta Medica). As such, placebo does not belong there, because they 'are' not drugs at all. It says on page 852: (as side-effects of a contraceptive (!!) placebo)

Decreased libido	29.5%
Headache	15.6%
Pain and Bloating in lower abdomen	13.7%
Dizziness	11.1%
Lumbar pain	8.0%
Nervousness	6.4%
Dysmenorrhoa	6.1%
Etc. Etc.

When the laughter has subsided somewhat, we may reflect upon the poor victims of such pseudological experimentation, the actual induction of headaches, dizziness, pain, etc. by placebo. Would not every sensible scientist be too much ashamed to put the procedure into print, in serious (?) medical literature?