It’s not your fault, ladies (and certainly not your partner’s), that you don’t orgasm every time you have intercourse, or that you lack the libido of a 17-year-old boy. You have a disease: female sexual dysfunction(FSD), and the pharmaceutical industry wants to help.
You are among the “43 percent of American women [who] experience some degree of impaired sexual function,” according to a Journal of the American Medical Association article. The FDA’s evolving definition of FSD includes decreased desire or arousal, sexual pain and orgasm difficulties—but only if the woman feels “personal distress” about it.
So, convincing women to feel distress is a key component of the drug company strategy to market a multi-billion-dollar pill that will cure billions of women of what may not ail them.
By promoting the belief that “normal” women have explosive sex all the time, BigPharma helped launch the disease. However, the FDA has yet to approve a treatment for women who fall short. Until then, they could try the Orgasmatron: a dial-a-delight spinal implant that rarely works—and risks infection and paralysis. Or, for $60/month, pop LexaFem pills—containing (how-could-it-not-work) “horny goat weed extract” in order to “feel like a real woman today.” Its website promises, “You won’t ever feel unhappy again with LexaFem in your arsenal.”
But the big swinging dicks of global FSD marketing (and off-label marketing) are Pfizer—whose stop-gap strategy is selling women Viagra based on the fact that it works for men, and Procter & Gamble (P&G), which, using the same logic, has put its money on testosterone.
Viagra’s failure in trial after trial to work on women has not stopped doctors from writing 1.4 million off-label prescriptions. FSD is “a classic example of starting with some preconceived, and non-evidence based diagnostic categorization for women’s sexual dysfunctions, based on the male model,” said John Bancroft, director of the Kinsey Institute, in an interview with BMJ (British Medical Journal).
No drug follows the male model more literally than testosterone. Despite FDA refusal to approve P&G’s testosterone patch Intrinsa, U.S. doctors wrote 2 million off-label testosterone prescriptions in 2007. Like Pfizer’s little blue pill, the Intrinsa patch doesn’t really work for women. No wonder: Researchers don’t even know what constitutes a “normal” female testosterone level, and women with low levels of the hormone are as likely as those with high levels to be happy with their sex lives. And as filmmaker Liz Canner shows in her excellent new documentary Orgasm, Inc., (www.orgasminc.org), testosterone is usually teamed with estrogen, which increases risks for stroke, cancers and dementia.
The Green Mountain Film Festival will feature Orgasm Inc., a documentary film about the pharmaceutical industry’s promotion of prescriptive aphrodisiacs.
The companies and clinics that narrow the range of sexual normality to porn industry standards suffer their own disease. Symptoms include: a compulsion to concoct illnesses and then develop drugs to treat them, and vice versa. Either way, the syndrome is typically accompanied by a rash of conflicts of interest.
A Pfizer survey in Malaysia found that Malay women are even more diseased than their American counterparts, with “69.6 percent experiencing some form of FSD,” according to the Journal of Sexual Medicine, which also published an industry-supported supplement on FSD. Journal editor and urologist Irwin Goldstein denies a conflict of interest. “Science is science,” he says. “It comes down to the bottom line. What the data shows, the data shows.” Actually, no. Drug company-funded studies are more likely than independent studies to find the new drug superior to the old. Perhaps the bottom line Dr. Goldstein refers to is his income as a paid consultant for drug companies, including P&G and Pfizer.
Goldstein established an FSD clinic with Dr. Jennifer Berman, who now heads a Beverly Hills clinic and appears on Oprah. As one of the health professionals on a 1998 panel that received financial sponsorship from eight pharmaceutical companies, she helped define female sexual dysfunction. Some 22 drug companies, including Pfizer, had financial ties to 18 of the 19 authors of that panel’s report, the BMJ revealed.
“Maybe the best approach is not ineffective, over-hyped drugs with nasty side effects, but an end to disease mongering and a strong dose of comprehensive sex education,” says filmmaker Canner. Her film hits female erogenous zones that pharmaceutical fixes can’t find: your brain and your funny bone.Editor’s note: This article is a reprint from In These Times.
The Green Mountain Film Festival will feature Orgasm Inc., a documentary film about the pharmaceutical industry’s promotion of prescriptive aphrodisiacs, at 6:15 p.m. Sunday, March 28 at the Pavilion Auditorium. The festival review follows: “In her shocking and often hilarious documentary, filmmaker Liz Canner takes a job editing erotic videos for a drug trial at a pharmaceutical company. Her employer is developing what it hopes will be a female Viagra: a drug for women that will win FDA approval to treat a new disease: female sexual dysfunction. Liz gains permission to film the company for her own documentary. Initially, she plans to create a movie about science and pleasure, but she soon begins to suspect that her employer, along with a cadre of other medical companies, might be trying to take advantage of women (and potentially endanger their health) in pursuit of billion-dollar profits.” Sponsored by Girls Just Wanna Have Fun (Naturally). Post-film event: discussion with filmmaker Liz Canner. 75 minutes.
































This is fascinating stuff, and I’ll totally be referencing it to people all week. I’d like to see the sources for two points, though.
In paragraph 7: “Researchers don’t even know what constitutes a ‘normal’ female testosterone level, and women with low levels of the hormone are as likely as those with high levels to be happy with their sex lives.”
And paragraph 9: “Drug company-funded studies are more likely than independent studies to find the new drug superior to the old.”
Terry Allen cites the following two sources:
–The Globe and Mail (Canada), October 1, 2005 Saturday, BYLINE: PAULINE COMEAU
The overriding impression created by drug company
promos and media reports is that low testosterone levels tell you who will complain of low libido. In fact, there isn’t even scientific agreement on how to measure the hormone in women or what ‘normal’ looks like. Even Ms. Davis
acknowledges that testosterone scores are useless as a diagnostic tool. Studies show that women with low scores are as likely to be happy with their sex lives as women with high numbers.
“I think sexual desire is an incredibly complex social issue. How you can reduce this to a biochemical factor is really puzzling to me,” says Barbara Marshall, professor of sociology and women’s studies at Trent University.
ALSO
The Philadelphia Inquirer, April 26, 2009 Sunday, By Marie McCullough; Inquirer Staff Writer
The science and safety of female testosterone supplementation also remains unclear. In general, female libido declines with age, as does testosterone, yet
blood levels of the hormone don’t correlate with desire, arousal, or function, studies show.
“Despite some 70 years of clinical use, we do not have a fully satisfactory rationale for testosterone therapy,” Canadian gynecologist and sex researcher Rosemary Basson wrote last year in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
[http://www.annals.org/content/148/8/620.full.pdf]
And paragraph 9: “Drug company-funded studies are more likely than independent studies to find the new drug superior to the old.”
There are many studies showing this. here is just one:
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/191/1/82
Yes, tell people, everywhere! And oh, BTW, don’t forget to include the mention of Dr. Scott Reuben’s numerous and fraudulent medical journal reports on behalf of Pfizer and Merck.The three major drugs that are known about at this time are Celebrex; Bextra, and Vioxx. The false reports are believed to be 30+ and were faked in the peer-reviewed journals: Anesthesia & Analgesia and The Day (put out in London). I very much doubt it’s the first time, either, since the audit showed he’d been doing this for 13 years.
http://www.theday.com/article/20100
Ahh, yes, the same people who don’t mind paying for false studies and then retracting when the person gets caught………I can’t believe people read this stuff and some actually believe it! good grief.
http://www.theday.com/article/20100225/BIZ02/302259454