It’s All in Your Head: Can Your Brain Trick Your Body Into Healing?

Imagine taking a pill with absolutely no active medication, yet somehow feeling better afterward. Sounds impossible, right? Surprisingly, this phenomenon is known as the placebo effect, where an individual’s symptoms may improve due to expectations and the context surrounding a treatment rather than its active ingredients (Wager and Atlas 2015). But can simply believing that a treatment will work actually produce biological changes, or is the improvement entirely psychological?

Although the placebo effect may sound like someone is simply imagining improvement, research suggests otherwise. Placebo responses involve changes in brain regions that process pain, emotions, and expectations. These reponses can also involve neurotransmitters such as dopamine and the brain’s naturally produced opioids, which contribute to pain regulation (Wager and Atlas 2015). This demonstrates how psychological expectations can influence chemical signalling in the nervous system, which highlights the relationship between psychology, chemistry, and biology

One paticularly intersting aspect of the placebo effect is its influence on pain perception. Benedetti et al. (2005) reviewed evidence showing that placebo-induced pain relief can involve activating the body’s endogenous opioid system. These natrually produced chemicals bind to the opiod recepors and influence how pain signals get processed by the nervous system (Benedetti et al. 2005). This connects to neuronal signalling, as changes in chemical communication between neurons can alter the perception of pain. Interestingly, this means that expecting relief can sometimes activate these biological pathways which are also involved in repsonses to pain relief medication.

However, this raises another question: does someone need to believe they are receiving real medication for the placebo effect to occur? Kaptchuk et al. (2010) invesitagted this through an experiment involving 80 patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The participants were divided into two groups: one received pills that were openly described as placebos, while the other received no treatment. After three weeks, participants receiving placebos reported significantly greater improvement in their symptoms (Kaptchuk et al. 2010). What makes this experiment particularly fascinating is that participants knew the pills contained no active medication, which suggests that placebo responses may involve more than simply believing a treatment is real.

Despite these findings, it is important to distinguish between experiencing symptom relief and actually treating an underlying disease. The study by Kaptchuk et al. (2010) primarily examined self-reported symptoms, meaning the results do not establish that placebos can cure IBS. Furthermore, placebo responses vary depending on the condition and treatment context (Wager and Atlas 2015).

The placebo effect demonstrates how closely psychological and physiological processes are connected. Through changes in neural activity and chemical signalling, expectations can influence how individuals experience physical symptoms. Although placebos cannot replace effective medical treatments, understanding their mechanisms may help researchers improve how treatments are delivered. Ultimately, the placebo effect can challenge the idea that healing is purely physical, revealing just how powerful the relationship between the brain and body can be.

References

Benedetti, Fabrizio, Helen S. Mayberg, Tor D. Wager, Christian S. Stohler, and Jon-Kar Zubieta. 2005. “Neurobiological Mechanisms of the Placebo Effect.” Journal of Neuroscience 25 (45): 10390–10402.https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3458-05.2005

Kaptchuk, Ted J., et al. 2010. “Placebos without Deception: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Irritable Bowel Syndrome.” PLOS ONE 5 (12): e15591. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015591

Wager, Tor D., and Lauren Y. Atlas. 2015. “The Neuroscience of Placebo Effects: Connecting Context, Learning and Health.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 16: 403–418. 10.1038/nrn3976

Comments

6 Responses to “It’s All in Your Head: Can Your Brain Trick Your Body Into Healing?”

  1. Sydney Shepherd Avatar
    Sydney Shepherd

    Hi Jua,

    This was a great blog post, and I found it especially interesting when you talked about how placebos are still affective when patients know what they’re being given. This highlights how incredibly complex the human brain is. Here are a few suggestions to improve your post:

    – In P1S2 you say “Surprisingly, this phenomenon is known as the placebo effect”, whereas I think you mean to say “Surprisingly it is true. This phenomenon is known as….”
    – You are missing a period at the end of P2
    – In P3S3 change “recepors” to “receptors”
    – Don’t forget to add a comment discussing your inspiration for the post!

    Overall great work, and I hope these suggestions help!

    Sydney

  2. Jua Seok Avatar
    Jua Seok

    Hi isci!!
    I chose to explore the placebo effect because it connects several concepts we’ve learned in iSci, particularly neuroscience, chemistry, and biology. In our lectures, we discussed how neurons communicate through electrical and chemical signals, which relates to how neurotransmitters and endogenous opioids influence pain perception. I found it especially interesting that psychological expectations can produce measurable biological responses, even without active medication. Researching this topic helped me better understand how interconnected our psychological and physiological processes are and why integrating different scientific disciplines is important when studying human health.

    Hope you guys enjoyed!
    – Jua

  3. Daniel Messih Avatar
    Daniel Messih

    Hi Jua!

    First off, this was such an interesting read! I really liked how you made such a complex subject easily digestible for the average reader while keeping everything accurate. Just a couple small suggestions:

    – I feel like you didn’t include enough chemistry in your blog, considering that it’s one of the two major strands of your post. If your word count permits, it would be great to see maybe a bit of elaboration on that part, perhaps such as the neurotransmitters portion.
    – You should stick to one type of in text citation, rather than switching between parenthetical and narrative in text citation.

    However, your blog post is still really well done, and you should be proud of what you’ve done! Happy editing!
    Daniel

  4. Mia Chen Avatar
    Mia Chen

    Hi Jua,

    This was an interesting read! I have always known how the placebo effect works, but after reading your blog post, I realized I still have much more to learn. Here are some edits I would suggest:

    -> Correct me if I’m wrong, but I do not think you need to repeat your citations. In P3 and P4, you first introduce the citations in a narrative style. If the paragraph sticks to that source with no additional information from other sources in between, you do not need to cite again.
    -> If word count allows, I think it would be nice to include some data. The graph/table could be data that visually explains the changes in brain regions that process pain, emotions, and expectations.
    -> Make sure to unlink your last citation!

    Overall, it was a great read. I look forward to reading your finalized post!

    -Mia

  5. Gurleen Kaur Avatar
    Gurleen Kaur

    Hey Jua,

    Your article was a great read and flowed extremely well. You write concisely and clearly, here are a couple suggestions to enhance it even more!

    Paragraph 3, line 1: correct the spelling of interesting (“intersting” is just missing the second “e”)

    In the fourth paragraph, you mention the idea towards the end that there may be more to placebo responses than an individual’s belief. If your word count permits, try to elaborate on that further as it provides a strong baseline for your article.

    You mention the intersections between physiology, psychology, chemistry, and biology, however do not explore these relationships beyond that. Try to find the specifics in these studies so that the evidence behind the claim is legitimized. To aid in understanding those statistics, a figure of some sort would also enhance this article!

    Good luck editing!
    Gurleen

  6. Emily Tai Avatar
    Emily Tai

    Hi Jua,

    This was a very interesting blog post, and I enjoyed learning about the placebo effect. I thought the open-label experiment in P4 was a strong example, and the limitations in P5 made the argument more balanced. Here are a few suggestions to improve your post:

    Spelling: Several words appear to be misspelled and should be corrected: “reponses” (P2S3), “paticularly intersting” (P3S1), “natrually” and “opiod recepors” (P3S3), “repsonses” (P3S5), and “invesitagted” (P4S2). P2S4 is also missing a period at the end. A quick proofread would fix these.

    P4S5: The sentence suggests that placebo responses involve “more than simply believing a treatment is real,” but it does not say what else might be involved. One sentence naming possible factors, such as the context and learning referred to in the title of Wager and Atlas (2015), would help readers understand what the experiment implies.

    References: The course outline asks for Chicago author-date style, which lists the authors in full rather than using “et al.” in the reference list. Kaptchuk et al. (2010) could be expanded accordingly.

    Overall, this was a very well written blog post. I look forward to reading your final draft!
    Emily

Leave a Reply