In the reading, the writer indicates that latest evidences have cast doubt on Placebo effect. On the other hand, the lecturer's claims that the placebo certainly have has effects on patients contrasts with the reading.
The first point made in the passage is that the placebo did not heal patients, but time allowed them to heal themselves. The lecturer, however, refutes this by arguing that the placebo is believable a method of curing the patients. Researchers have compared patients with the placebo effect with those of not treated. The professor uses an example of chronic symptoms, which can be treated and get better through a the placebo.
Another point, the reading puts an emphasis on, is that it is rather lifestyles that influence ill people. In contrast, this is directly rebutted by the lecturer's claim that the lifestyles do not affect patients. For example, depression was cured with a drug, which has no physiological effects.
Lastly, the passage says that patients tend to respond objectively in front of surveyors. This point disagrees with the lecture, which contends that there is true evidence that strongly supports the fact that patients clearly got healthier. Their blood pressure levels evidently changed after the placebo treatment.