
Viagra turns 10 this month, and didn8217;t time just fly? It seems like only yesterday we started guffawing at the Symbolism for Dummies ads on TV for the little blue pill and its 8220;erectile dysfunction8221; rivals 8212; footballs tossed through tires, faucets erupting. The spots ended with a list of potential side effects that sounded like a satire of potential side effects. 8216;More than four hours ?8221; we winced. 8220;Ouch8221;.
However discomfiting the commercials, the Food and Drug Administration8217;s approval of Viagra 8212; on March 27, 1998 8212; is a landmark day in the history of sex. It seemed at the time like a biomedical revolution was upon us all, and about five minutes after word of the magical med went global, the question first was asked: Where is the women8217;s version of Viagra?
The short answer: They8217;re still working on it. A bunch of companies have tried and failed to create 8220;pink Viagra8221;, as it8217;s often called. Other companies have drugs in late stages of clinical testing, including a gel that recently began a make-or-break nationwide study with several thousand women. Give us five years, maybe less, say the most optimistic researchers and doctors. Though it8217;s unclear exactly how many women would ask for a prescription, no one doubts that the first company that gets to market a remedy for female sexual dysfunction, as it8217;s formally known, will earn a fortune.
But as this race reaches what could be its final lap, not all of the spectators are cheering. Some, in fact, are booing as loudly as they can.
A modest-size but fervent group of psychologists, academics and public health advocates contend that FSD isn8217;t an authentic medical condition, or at least not the sort of problem that should be treated with drugs. These aren8217;t the obtuse male physicians who for decades have been telling women distressed by their lack of libido that 8220;it8217;s all in your head.8221;