With research trials involving pills, it is not as dangerous to give some people the placebo, but is it ethical with invasive surgery? Are there other examples of this in the medical arena? Do they have studies where people with another diseased or defective organ are put into two groups, both of which have the surgery but one group does not have the organ altered or removed? Why can't they compare people having the cere120 therapy with a matched group (same level of symptoms, same age, ethnic background, same state of health otherwise, etc.)? After a period of time, compare progression of symptoms.
It seems to me that doing sham surgery is unnecessary unless they are just comparing safety of the operation, not efficacy. If the former is the reason for the sham, the people undergoing it should be so informed.
Ann