When there is invasive brain surgery - as in the Ceregene trial for the participants who got the real treatment, would those participants have a different, more severe case of facial swelling than the participants who had "sham - the burr hole" surgery? And would the participants who got the real treatment (i.e. invasive surgery) have other different, and more severe reactions after the surgery?

I don't have any facts one way or the other, but I think this is a question that researchers should honestly answer.

Because if my supposition is correct - that physical reaction after sham brain surgery is different from invasive brain surgery, then having sham brain surgery doesnt produce a truly "blind" trial. And that would be a BIG reason to rethink and hopefully stop this sham surgery business.