Economics and medicine can in no way provide an adequate comparison.
Much of medicine is in the mind even when a drug is prescribed. The complaint against your offer was that there may be nothing wrong with the patient, yet they insist that there is and some drug will help them. With no evidence of an underlying malady you are opposed to the doctor prescribing a placebo. Or in the case where the patients desire for a specific advertised drug is also not indicated for their "condition" the doctor can not exercise his training and "treat" HIS patient in the manner that best suits HIS patient.
Part of the problem is again the assumption that if the patient is at the doctor that there must absolutely be something wrong!

Quote Originally Posted by SadisticNature View Post
So its acceptable for doctors to trick patients into paying for something that's only value to them is psychological?

Lets try that in the finances, would you agree with the following statement?

"It's ok for a financial banker to trick someone about how safe their investments are as long as they believe the person will make money?"

To me these situations seem comparable, you're deliberately tricking someone, and justify it by believing you are doing it for their own good. You might be right (and lots of data shows placebo's can help), but you might be wrong as well (you might prevent them from pursuing a better course of treatment).

If someone actually wanted a placebo let them sign up for a research study, they'll either get a placebo or something that potentially works and is safe enough for testing on humans.