On Thu, 9 May 2002 00:05:02 +0100, "Ruthie" <rah3 at ukc.ac.uk> wrote:
>>"Richard S. Norman" <rnorman at umich.edu> wrote in message
>news:d67iduo03q5ibc8f6dib9djq0q28e774pu at 4ax.com...>>> Sorry about the technical jargon. Was it "glucocorticosteroid" that
>> got to you?
>>Your big words don't scare me and don't impress me - I can use big words
>>If so, that refers to the hormone cortisol which is a
>> steroid from the adrenal cortex (a cortico-steroid) which is involved
>> in controlling carbohydrate metabolism (gluco - corticosteroid as
>> opposed to aldosterone that controls salt metabolism, a
>>Why thank you - you must be very clever. It is a shame that truly great
>minds can communicate their ideas to a wide audience - do you write for
>academia? I can tell.
>>> And none of this hypothesizing is my idea at all. It all originates
>> in a post from James Michael Howard on May 7 which has
>> unfortunately been snipped out of the discussion. He is the
>> one to propose the DHEA vs cortisol activity. I was just questioning
>> whether the placebo effect derived from the actual sugar content
>> of the pill or from the fact of a treatment, what James Howard later
>> on March 7 called the perceived hypothetical outcome.
>>Indeed, but it seems that some other people have misunderstood your posts
>and those that have gone before it because of the use of technical jargon.
>>just cos u be an academic wiv an edumakation don't mean u scare me.
>OK Ruthie, I will try to write and just use short words so you can
Here is the exact content of my first message in this thread:
"How much sugar is there likely to be in a "sugar" pill or placebo?
Perhaps a couple hundred mg? As much as 1 gram (which seems
fairly extreme)? Is that enough to cause any significant change in
Is that too technical for you? And here is the next one:
"I thought that the original post was suggesting that the sugar,
itself, was acting as a "drug" to cause the hormone shift. I guess I
was focusing on the "gluco"corticosteroid nature of cortisol. But
apparently I was wrong. It was the psychosomatic effect of being
treated acting through the "stress mechanism" that was being
suggested as the basis for the placebo effect."
Maybe I am just too academic for you, but I really have a problem
seeing just what is too hard to read in that. I did use a technical
word to describe cortisol, but in context it was quite appropriate.
And you seemed to rankle when I explained it to you.
Sorry, this (bionet.neuroscience) is a newsgroup for scientists. If
non-technical people want to listen in, you are free to do so. But
don't complain about scientists talking grown-up talk with each other!