NY Times One
day in the fall of 1981, eight men in their 70s stepped out of a van in
front of a converted monastery in New Hampshire. They shuffled forward,
a few of them arthritically stooped, a couple with canes. Then they
passed through the door and entered a time warp. Perry Como crooned on a
vintage radio. Ed Sullivan welcomed guests on a black-and-white TV.
Everything inside — including the books on the shelves and the magazines
lying around — were designed to conjure 1959. This was to be the men’s
home for five days as they participated in a radical experiment, cooked
up by a young psychologist named Ellen Langer.
The
subjects were in good health, but aging had left its mark. “This was
before 75 was the new 55,” says Langer, who is 67 and the
longest-serving professor of psychology at Harvard. Before arriving, the
men were assessed on such measures as dexterity, grip strength,
flexibility, hearing and vision, memory and cognition — probably the
closest things the gerontologists of the time could come to the testable
biomarkers of age. Langer predicted the numbers would be quite
different after five days, when the subjects emerged from what was to be
a fairly intense psychological intervention.
Langer
had already undertaken a couple of studies involving elderly patients.
In one, she found that nursing-home residents who had exhibited early
stages of memory loss were able to do better on memory tests when they
were given incentives to remember — showing that in many cases,
indifference was being mistaken for brain deterioration. In another, now
considered a classic of social psychology, Langer gave houseplants to
two groups of nursing-home residents. She told one group that they were
responsible for keeping the plant alive and that they could also make
choices about their schedules during the day. She told the other group
that the staff would care for the plants, and they were not given any
choice in their schedules. Eighteen months later, twice as many subjects
in the plant-caring, decision-making group were still alive than in the
control group.
To
Langer, this was evidence that the biomedical model of the day — that
the mind and the body are on separate tracks — was wrongheaded. The
belief was that “the only way to get sick is through the introduction of
a pathogen, and the only way to get well is to get rid of it,” she
said, when we met at her office in Cambridge in December. She came to
think that what people needed to heal themselves was a psychological
“prime” — something that triggered the body to take curative measures
all by itself. Gathering the older men together in New Hampshire, for
what she would later refer to as a counterclockwise study, would be a
way to test this premise.
[...]
Placebo effects have already been proven to work on the immune system.
But this study could show for the first time that they work in a
different way — that is, through an act of will. “As far as we know
today, the placebo responses in the immune system are attributable to
unconscious classical conditioning,” says the Italian neuroscientist
Fabrizio Benedetti, a leading expert in placebo effects. In Benedetti’s
experiments, a suggestion planted in the minds of test subjects produced
physiological changes directly, the way a dinner bell might goose the
salivary glands of a dog. (In one study, healthy volunteers given a
placebo — a suggestion that any pain they experienced was actually
beneficial to their bodies — were found to produce higher levels of
natural painkillers.) “There’s no evidence that expectations play a role
as well,” Benedetti says. Langer plans to further analyze the subjects’
saliva to see whether they actually have the rhinovirus and not just
elevated IgA. [...]
Really interesting article. Thanks for calling it to my attention.
ReplyDelete