Evidence standards
What we claim. What we don't.
Every research claim on this site links to its primary source. Here is exactly how we read the evidence, what standards we hold ourselves to, and where the limits are.
What We Claim
Mycebo is an inert capsule. There is no active ingredient. We say this on the label, on the website, and in every customer communication. We are not claiming Mycebo treats, cures, prevents, or mitigates any disease or condition.
What we do claim — carefully, with citations — is that open-label placebos have produced measurable outcomes in published research. Specifically: open-label placebo trials have shown statistically significant improvements versus no-treatment controls in studies on irritable bowel syndrome, chronic low back pain, and migraine. We link to those studies. We tell you their sample sizes, their designs, and who funded them.
We don't claim Mycebo replicates those results. We claim the science is interesting, the mechanism is real, and the practice is worth trying with clear eyes.
How We Cite
Every research claim on this website links to the primary source — the peer-reviewed publication or pre-registration record, not a press release or secondary summary. Each citation includes:
- Authors, journal, year, and DOI
- Sample size and study design (randomized trial, observational study, meta-analysis — stated explicitly)
- Funding source, because industry-funded work deserves more scrutiny, not less
If a study is small, we say it is small. If a study has methodological limitations, we say so. If the evidence is mixed, we say it is mixed. We would rather lose a sale than oversell a citation.
Our Own Research
Starting in June 2026, every Mycebo customer who consents is enrolled in the Mycebo Open Placebo Registry, an observational study with an optional deeper protocol arm. The full design is pre-registered on OSF before the first response is collected — meaning the analysis plan is public before we see any data.
We commit to publishing all results, including nulls. A negative finding is not a bad outcome; it is a data point. We have no financial model that depends on a positive trial result, and we intend to keep it that way.
Registry data (anonymized) will be released publicly under CC BY 4.0. Anton is the company founder and a co-author on Mycebo-funded work; this conflict is disclosed in every publication and on every page of the registry.
Conflict of Interest
Anton founded Mycebo and is its primary funder. This is a conflict of interest and we are not pretending otherwise.
Our mitigation: independent academic co-authors on all published work; pre-registration of every protocol; full disclosure of funding in every publication; no financial arrangements that tie researcher compensation to study outcomes.
We follow the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and the Hong Kong Principles for responsible research practices. We aspire to Cochrane-level methodological transparency, even for studies we run ourselves.
What We Will Never Do
Pay for journal placement, sponsored supplements, or any form of pay-to-publish arrangement
Cite a podcast, press article, or blog post as if it were a peer-reviewed finding
Use “as featured in” language to imply scientific endorsement by a publication that covered us journalistically
Use celebrity endorsement of our research findings
Claim a study is “peer-reviewed” before it has been peer-reviewed
Call an observational survey a “clinical trial”
Suppress or decline to publish a result because it is null or unfavorable
Accept affiliate or influencer arrangements from partners who make medical claims about Mycebo
Standards We Reference
The field has produced some clear benchmarks for responsible evidence communication. We use these as our North Stars, not as marketing signals:
Systematic review methodology and evidence grading
Responsible use of research metrics
Integrity, rigor, and transparency in reporting
CONSORT extension for N-of-1 trials (governs our Track B reporting)
Public registration of hypotheses and analysis plans before data collection
A Note on What We Don't Know
The open-label placebo literature is promising and preliminary. Most trials are small. Effect sizes are moderate. The mechanism of action is debated. We don't know whether daily ritual practice drives outcomes, or expectation, or both, or neither. We are genuinely trying to find out. The honest answer right now is: the science is real enough to take seriously and incomplete enough to require humility.
That is the accurate statement. Everything else on this page is designed to protect it.
Primary Citations
- Kaptchuk TJ et al. (2010). "Placebos without Deception: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Irritable Bowel Syndrome." PLOS ONE 5(12): e15591. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015591. N=80, RCT, funded by NIH / NCCAM.
- Carvalho C et al. (2016). "Open-Label Placebo Treatment in Chronic Low Back Pain." Pain 157(12): 2766–2772. DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000700. N=97, RCT, funded by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portugal).
- Kam-Hansen S et al. (2014). "Altered Placebo and Drug Labeling Changes the Outcome of Episodic Migraine Attacks." Science Translational Medicine 6(218): 218ra5. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3006175. N=66, crossover trial, funded by NIH.
- Ariely D et al. (2008). "Commercial Features of Placebo and Therapeutic Efficacy." JAMA 299(9): 1016–1017. DOI: 10.1001/jama.299.9.1016. N=82, RCT, funded by NIH. Cited for pricing-context field note; not a primary OLP study.
Citations are for informational context only. Mycebo makes no claim that our products replicate the outcomes of any cited clinical research.
DRAFT — not counsel approved. Content on this page has not been reviewed by a regulatory attorney prior to publication. A full legal review is in progress.
Questions about our evidence standards? Email us.