There is as yet no reason to think placebo is a 'real' effect, except for cases of subjective symptoms or body functions under conscious control (directly like breathing rhythm or indirectly like pulse).
For all other cases, like infections or tumors, the placebo effect seems to only be a measure of poorly understood differences in natural processes, which can cause spontaneous remissions at unpredictable rates.
The act of giving fake medicine to the control group has no direct effect on the people taking it - the idealized study results would almost certainly be the same if the control group received no medication at all. However, the reported data would be much harder to trust, as it would be obvious for the data collectors and pacients which group they are part of, making it trivial for them to misreport data and symptoms to influence the result in the direction they desire (whether consciously or not).
That is the real reason for the double blind study design in most tteatments - fear of fake data, not any mysterious healing/detrimental effects from the act of taking sugar pills.
For all other cases, like infections or tumors, the placebo effect seems to only be a measure of poorly understood differences in natural processes, which can cause spontaneous remissions at unpredictable rates.
The act of giving fake medicine to the control group has no direct effect on the people taking it - the idealized study results would almost certainly be the same if the control group received no medication at all. However, the reported data would be much harder to trust, as it would be obvious for the data collectors and pacients which group they are part of, making it trivial for them to misreport data and symptoms to influence the result in the direction they desire (whether consciously or not).
That is the real reason for the double blind study design in most tteatments - fear of fake data, not any mysterious healing/detrimental effects from the act of taking sugar pills.