Don’t confuse the Nobel Prize with the Ig Nobel Prize! At first glance, one prize seems serious while the other appears silly. The Nobel Prize celebrates the achievements of outstanding researchers, writers, and peace activists whose work benefits humanity. In contrast, the Ig Nobel Prize rewards imaginative and humorous scientific studies that first make people laugh–and then make them think.

The Ig Nobel Prize was created in 1991 by Marc Abrahams, editor and co-founder of the Annals of Improbable Research. Like the Nobel Prize, the Ig Nobel Prize is awarded annually.

If you’re like me, simply scanning the list of winning research projects is enough to make you burst out laughing. Here are some examples: The Physiology Prize, awarded “for discovering that many mammals are capable of breathing through their anus.” The Probability Prize, given “for showing, both in theory and by conducting 350,757 experiments, that when you flip a coin, it tends to land on the same side as it started.” And the Anatomy Prize, for investigating whether the hair on people’s heads in the northern hemisphere tends to swirl in the same direction (clockwise or counterclockwise) as the hair on those in the southern hemisphere.

Unsurprisingly, the Medicine Prize made me laugh the most–and then made me think the hardest. It was awarded to Lieven A. Schenk, Tahmine Fadai, and Christian Büchel “for demonstrating that fake medicine causing painful side effects can be more effective than fake medicine without side effects.” Their study was published in the journal Brain in August.

A total of 77 healthy individuals participated in the study. They were led to believe the goal was to test the effects of a potent painkiller in a placebo-controlled experiment. The participants were told the nasal spray they were given might contain fentanyl, a narcotic analgesic. However, unbeknownst to them, none of the sprays contained any active pain medication. Instead, the sprays contained either a small amount of capsaicin–an irritant found in hot peppers that causes a burning sensation in the nose–or no active ingredients at all.

Afterward, the researchers inflicted pain on the participants using a device that applied measured levels of heat. While the heat levels weren’t enough to cause injury, they were sufficient to cause discomfort. Participants rated their pain on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 100 (maximum tolerable pain).

In the second phase of the study, functional brain MRIs were performed after repeating the procedure. These scans detect changes in brain activity and provided further insight into the participants’ responses.

The results were surprising. Although none of the participants had received a painkiller, those exposed to the capsaicin nasal spray — which caused irritation — were more likely to believe they had received pain relief and reported experiencing less pain. Functional MRI scans revealed heightened activity in the brain regions that process pain in those participants who received the capsaicin spray and expected it to alleviate their pain. This suggests that the effect wasn’t just psychological–it had measurable physiological correlates.

The idea that side effects might enhance a treatment’s effectiveness is intriguing. The study’s authors propose a shift in the way side effects are viewed. Instead of seeing them as purely negative, doctors and patients could frame side effects as a sign that the treatment is working.

For me, this study, besides its entertaining value and its surprising outcomes, is a reminder of the complexities involved in the connection between mind and body. Our mind plays tricks on us. Our experiences often derive not only from the material, objective world, but from our expectations, perceptions, and the way we interpret our own personal universe.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Shahar Madjar, MD, MBA, is a urologist and an author. He practices in Michigan, at Schoolcraft Memorial Hospital in Manistique, and in Baraga County Memorial Hospital in L’Anse. Find his books on Amazon or contact him at smadjar@yahoo.com.