Placebo effects on nausea and motion sickness are resistant to experimentally-induced stress.

Nausea often occurs in stressful situations, such as chemotherapy or surgery. Clinically relevant placebo effects in nausea have been demonstrated, but it remains unclear whether stress has an impact on these effects. The aim of this experimental study was to investigate the interplay between acute stress and placebo effects in nausea. 80 healthy female volunteers susceptible to motion sickness were randomly assigned to either the Maastricht Acute Stress Test or a non-stress control condition, and to either placebo treatment or no treatment. Nausea was induced by a virtual vection drum and behavioral, psychophysiological as well as humoral parameters were repeatedly assessed. Manipulation checks confirmed increased cortisol levels and negative emotions in the stressed groups. In the non-stressed groups, the placebo intervention improved nausea, symptoms of motion sickness, and gastric myoelectrical activity (normo-to-tachy (NTT) ratio). In the stressed groups, the beneficial effects of the placebo intervention on nausea and motion sickness remained unchanged, whereas no improvement of the gastric NTT ratio was observed. Results suggest that placebo effects on symptoms of nausea and motion sickness are resistant to experimentally-induced stress. Stress most likely interfered with the validity of the gastric NTT ratio to measure nausea and thus the gastric placebo effect.

Effects of Placebo Interventions on Subjective and Objective Markers of Appetite-A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objective: Patients' expectations about the benefit of an intervention are important determinants of the placebo effect. Little is known about the extent to which expectations influence outcomes of treatments in the field of appetite regulation. This study aimed to investigate the effects of treatment-related expectations on subjective and objective markers of appetite. Methods: 90 healthy participants of normal weight were randomly allocated to either an appetite-enhancing placebo group, a satiety-enhancing placebo group, or a control group. All participants received a placebo capsule along with group-specific verbal suggestions to either be appetite-promoting, or satiety-enhancing, or to have no effect on appetite. Before and during the 2 h following randomization, participants were repeatedly asked to rate feelings of hunger and satiety on visual analog scales (VAS), and blood samples were taken repeatedly to assess plasma ghrelin levels as a physiological marker of hunger. Results: In comparison to the control group, the satiety-enhancing placebo intervention significantly reduced appetite and increased satiety. The appetite-enhancing placebo intervention did not alter subjective levels of hunger, but increased plasma ghrelin levels in females. Conclusions: Results provide the first experimental evidence that appetite-regulating placebo interventions can elicit a psychobiological response. Expectations are important factors to consider when evaluating the effects of interventions in the field of appetite regulation.