Casanova used oysters and chocolate to delight his female companions.
They actually did nothing, though.
I 've been eating them but haven't been the lady I always thought I would be.
So, for its manufacturers, the promise of something that might serve as a spring medicine would be a financial blockbuster.
Enter flibanserin, which has just been approved by the US (will soon be renamed Addyi)S.
The Food and Drug Administration and it seems to be getting approval from Health Canada soon.
This is the first drug to treat women with decreased sexual desire (HSDD.
The only problem is that many experts believe that HSDD does not actually exist and that the drug is ineffective and has terrible side effects and is only approved for successful lobbying.
This is an interesting story.
Flibanserin was originally an-
Proved to be a flop.
But when reviewing the trial data, the researchers found that the sex life of the patient improved.
Therefore, it is repackaged as a drug to enhance sexual desire.
The study has been completed and the data has been submitted to the FDA.
But the FDA unanimously rejected the drug in 2010.
On 2013, the manufacturer resubmitted the application without fear.
Rejected again.
Their appeal was rejected.
The FDA has two basic questions about the drug.
First of all, they don't think it works.
To measure the effect of the drug on sexual desire, the researchers asked the study participants to write a diary every day.
When the results were analyzed, there was no difference between flibanserin and placebo.
The only real difference is the number of "satisfying sex.
This increased by 0 on average.
5 Activities per month.
Clearly, the FDA does not see an increase in orgasm every two months as a meaningful improvement.
To address this issue, the manufacturer changed the methodology and asked the study participants to use the Female Sexual Function Index, a questionnaire that asked the subjects to recall their experiences over the past four weeks rather than a daily diary.
It's hard to remember exactly what happened a few weeks ago, so keeping a diary every day is almost always preferred. On the six-
Point scale, flibanserin shows 0.
Sexual desire increased by 3 points.
It's hard to say what this means in real life.
The second major problem facing the FDA is that side effects outweigh any small potential benefits.
In some patients, Flibanserin causes a sudden drop in blood pressure and loss of consciousness. That’s bad.
What's worse, if you mix it with alcohol, the symptoms are more obvious.
Given that alcohol preceded most sexual contact
At least according to HBO.
There is some concern about this particular interaction.
It also interacts with a large number of drugs, including birth control pills.
Think about it: a sex pill that interacts with alcohol and birth control pills.
We are here, however.
In view of the two major issues of FDA rejection, the manufacturer decided to change the strategy and launched an activity called amedia.
The information is simple.
The FDA is discriminatory because they approve drugs like Viagra but do not have flibanserin.
They also renamed flibanserin "pink Viagra" or "female Viagra ".
"The information on their website indicates that 26 drugs have been approved for male sexual dysfunction and there is only one for women now. This is untrue.
First, (gel, patch, pill, etc ).
) Like a different drug, it's stupid.
It is also worth noting that testosterone has enough side effects (it increases the risk of heart attack) and no one should take it just to treat low sexual desire.
In addition, Viagra and flibanserin are completely different drugs and can do completely different things.
They have nothing to do with another person.
Drugs like Viagra and Cialis do not actually increase sexual desire.
They are Diester phosphate inhibitors, drugs that expand arteries and improve blood flow.
In this case, they improve the blood flow of the penis to initiate and maintain the erection.
They don't want you to have sex.
Also, while drugs like Viagra are taken as needed, flibanserin must be taken daily in the long run.
Comparing them is a good marketing strategy, but it is not very scientific.
Fundamentally, the difference between a man and a woman is that sexual dysfunction is a problem of ability for a man.
Age, smoking, diabetes and high blood pressure can lead to vascular stenosis, which makes erection more difficult.
This is a biological problem. these drugs provide a biological solution.
For women, sexual dysfunction is more complex and rarely occurs because of a problem like a male.
This is a complex interaction of emotional, psychological, social and environmental issues.
A woman's sexual organs are some of the advantages of her brain's old jokes.
Sometimes, medical problems can affect women's sexual desire, but in the early days, flibanserin was specifically studied.
Menopause women without medical problems.
Women who take a very long list of drugs are also banned.
As part of its media campaign, the certification of many women with low active sexual drive disorder was distributed to the FDA.
Of course, the irony is that many of them will not see flibanserin.
What is lacking in beauty is that there is actually no sexual loss.
Removed it from the nearest DSM
A disease handbook that defines medical mental illness.
Many experts believe that sexual desire disorder was a relic of the 1950 s, when medical diagnosis was "cold sex" and "nym madness ".
There is a growing consensus that there is not too little or too much sex.
Even so, the "even points" campaign was successful.
It was supported by 11 members of Congress in the United States, mobilized feminist groups and put enough pressure on the FDA to provide qualified approval for flibanserin.
It is worth noting that a number of feminist lobby groups saw through the strategy and opposed the approval of the drug.
Still, the third time is the charm of drug approval, which will almost certainly open the door to radical media campaigns aimed at persuading women that they have a disease.
So we have a drug that doesn't really work and has serious side effects that can treat a disease that doesn't exist and it's not approved because of science but because of a media campaign
I don't think Casanova will agree.