The walnut effect: when fear and negative expectations hurt us

THE’walnut effect implies the appearance or worsening of a symptom, regardless of the presence of a real cause, due to thenegative expectation of the patient: in other words, You feel bad because you expect to feel bad. It is the opposite of the famous placebo effectthat is, that improvement of the symptoms and the health condition that occurs thanks to the belief of receiving effective treatment, even if in reality it is an inert substance.

When the mind sabotage: how the walnut effect works

In the clinical field, the walnut effect is documented in numerous studies: for example, the intake of a drug causes in some patients headache, nausea or joint pain only after those who take it was informed of possible side effectseven if the drug in question is devoid of active ingredient (Benedetti, 2012). In fact, according to psychosomatic medicine, the body can physically react to intense emotional states such as fear or anxiety. But it is the cultural member Which makes the walnut particularly interesting for social sciences: what we fear is also socially learned, through narratives, media, widespread beliefs.

Health culture and suspicion society

Ours is a company increasingly attentive to health, but also obsessed with the disease. The hyperexposure to health information – often incomplete, contradictory or sensationalistic – contributes to generating a constant alarm climate. Niklas Luhmann (1991), theorist of systems, described the society of our era as a “risk society”, where the management of uncertainty becomes a central element of our daily life and our thoughts. In this circumstance, the distrust of drugs, vaccines, technologies and health institutions can translate into a walnut effect: the body reacts negatively not so much to what happens, but what is believed can happen.

Nocebo as a social phenomenon: stigma, power, expectations

So the walnut effect can also be read as one manifestation of the power of social expectations. When a group is continually exposed to negative messages – for example, “you are fragile”, “you are at risk”, “you will never heal” – tends to internalize these narratives.

Michel Foucault (1975), in his studies on the biopouter, showed how the bodies are governed through medical knowledge and disciplinary rules. The walnut effect can also be understood as a symbolic power effect: The body responds to a discursive context (i.e. the set of words, ideas, images and stories that circulate on a certain topic and that influence the way we think) that describes it as a sick person, weak, vulnerable. This is the case of many effects reported by stigmatized or hypermedicalized communities, where the discomfort is not born only from objective conditions, but also from the social and cultural pressure.

The walnut effect reminds us that It is not enough to divide mind and body, reality and perception. Health is also a social construction, influenced by expectations, trust, culture and communication. Understanding the walnut does not mean denying people’s symptoms, but recognizing how deeply our body speaks the language of the society in which we live.