In this article we propose a critical reassessment of Daniel Moerman's "meaning response." First, we reconstruct and criticize Moerman's original proposal of introducing the "meaning response" as a way of clarifying some terminological and conceptual issues in the placebo debate. Next we evaluate the criticisms that Moerman's proposal is epistemically moot since other existing and more empirically grounded models already account for all the phenomena that fall under the concept of the "meaning response." We conclude that Moerman's original proposal is inherently problematic and that, in order to be instrumentally useful in the future, the meaning response must be reconceived so that it may finally support, rather than oppose, other theoretical and empirical lines of research currently ongoing in the field of placebo studies.