Scientology CCHR Attacks The New “Female Viagra”

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Scientology CCHR Attacks The New “Female Viagra”

Code:
http://www.cchrint.org/2015/08/20/femaleviagraisantidepressant/

attachment.php






* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *


Mind Games—The New “Female Viagra” is Actually an Antidepressant

Mind games: An act of calculated psychological manipulation, done especially to confuse or intimidate— American Heritage Dictionary

“The use of dangerous mind-altering drugs to allegedly increase a woman’s sexual desire is simply a continuation of the FDA and APA’s history of pathologizing normal female behavior and it is a disservice to women everywhere.”


By Kelly Patricia O’Meara

August 20, 2015

In what can only be described as an extraordinarily sexist action, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the drug “Addyi,” which is misleadingly being touted as the “Female Viagra.” But unlike Viagra, which affects blood flow to the male genitals, Addyi, the “pink Viagra” for women, is all about messing with their minds—it’s an antidepressant drug.

And it only gets worse. Addyi, an antidepressant drug, was designed to “treat” the so-called mental disorder, Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD), or female sexual interest/arousal disorder. In short, this drug approval not only suggests, but supports, the absurd notion that women, for any number of reasons, who do not seek sexual arousal, are somehow suffering from a mental illness.

“Addyi” reportedly increases the brain chemicals dopamine and noradrenalin, while at the same time reducing Serotonin and, voila, increased sexual desire is achieved. It all sounds scientific. A little chemical increase here, a reduction there, and the female libido is revved up and ready to go. But it’s not that simple and, in the case of the antidepressant, “Addyi,” there are some very serious, even life-threatening adverse reactions.

First though, as is the case with all antidepressants, no one has a clue how “Addyi” actually works in the brain to “treat” the alleged mental disorder HSDD and, according to the FDA advisory committee on the drug, “the precise mechanism of action by which flibanserin enhances sexual desire in patients with HSDD is not known.” What is known though is that while the FDA has approved “Addyi,” the federal agency is covering its actions by attaching serious drug oversight and warnings.

The clinical trial results were marginal at best—women taking “Addyi” experienced an increase of about 0.5 to 1 sexually satisfying events per month compared to women taking the placebo—and based on the results, the risks associated with “Addyi” could be far less pleasurable. For example, the FDA is requiring that “Addyi” carry its most serious “black box” warning, advising the drug should not be used by those who drink alcohol, as it increases the risk of severely low blood pressure (hypotension) and fainting (syncope). Other common side effects include dizziness, somnolence, nausea, fatigue, insomnia and dry mouth.

The FDA is so concerned about the possible adverse effects of “Addyi” on women that it is requiring doctors and pharmacists to watch an online presentation and pass a test of their understanding, literally becoming certified to prescribe and dispense the drug.

While most would agree that it is insulting and demeaning to suggest women suffer from a mental illness because of a lack of desire to participate in a sexual act, this isn’t the first time the FDA, with the help of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), has become an accomplice in what can only be described as disease mongering.

The APA decided by a show-of-hands vote that Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD), also known as PMS, is a mental disorder and pharmaceutical giant, Eli Lilly, jumped on the bandwagon repackaging its blockbuster antidepressant, Prozac, as a new “treatment” for PMDD called Sarafem.

There was nothing “new” about Sarafem, as there is literally no chemical difference between the antidepressants Prozac and Sarafem. Lilly simply changed the color of the pill from green to the very feminine pink and lavender and sold it as a new “treatment” for a nonexistent mental disorder. Like Prozac and Sarafem, the new pink “Addyi” is a thrice failed antidepressant repackaged as a first of its kind “treatment” for women “suffering” from the alleged mental illness of not wanting sex.

Beyond the known dangerous side effects associated with the antidepressant, “Addyi,” and the nonexistent mental disorder it alleges to “treat,” there are other questions that scream for answers, such as who decides what is the “normal” number of sexual encounters a woman may desire? And, if a woman desires less sex than others, does that require chemically altering the brain?

There have long been obvious differences between the sexual drive and desires of men and woman, comically revealed by Billy Crystal in the film City Slickers when he explained “women need a reason to have sex, men just need a place.” True or not, the use of dangerous mind-altering drugs to allegedly increase a woman’s sexual desire is simply a continuation of the FDA and APA’s history of pathologizing normal female behavior and it is a disservice to women, not a mental disorder.

Kelly Patricia O’Meara is an award-winning former investigative reporter for the Washington Times’ Insight Magazine, penning dozens of articles exposing the fraud of psychiatric diagnosis and the dangers of the psychiatric drugs—including her ground-breaking 1999 cover story, “Guns & Doses,” exposing the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence. She is also the author of the highly acclaimed book, Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills that Kill. Prior to working as an investigative journalist, O’Meara spent sixteen years on Capitol Hill as a congressional staffer to four Members of Congress. She holds a B.S. in Political Science from the University of Maryland.


* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *
 

Attachments

  • FemaleViagra.jpg
    FemaleViagra.jpg
    70.4 KB · Views: 223

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
As soon as FDA approval went through.....the company was bought by a Canadian Pharmaceutical Company....Valeant.....for 1 billion dollars.....today.

From what I've read....it does have mind affecting properties....

http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/20/news/companies/female-libido-sprout-valeant/index.html
Well, to some extent it is supposed to have "mind affecting properties." Unlike Viagra for men, the purpose of this new drug is not to cure erectile dysfunction (duh). The purpose is to help women who believe they have a problem with arousal, and for whatever reason want to feel more aroused or often aroused.

I guess the problem is caused by the FDA Storm Troupers who SWAT raid houses, hold guns to women's heads, and force them to take the drug.
 

George Layton

Silver Meritorious Patron
Scientology CCHR Attacks The New “Female Viagra”

Code:
http://www.cchrint.org/2015/08/20/femaleviagraisantidepressant/

attachment.php






* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *


Mind Games—The New “Female Viagra” is Actually an Antidepressant

Mind games: An act of calculated psychological manipulation, done especially to confuse or intimidate— American Heritage Dictionary
“The use of dangerous mind-altering drugs to allegedly increase a woman’s sexual desire is simply a continuation of the FDA and APA’s history of pathologizing normal female behavior and it is a disservice to women everywhere.”


By Kelly Patricia O’Meara

August 20, 2015

In what can only be described as an extraordinarily sexist action, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the drug “Addyi,” which is misleadingly being touted as the “Female Viagra.” But unlike Viagra, which affects blood flow to the male genitals, Addyi, the “pink Viagra” for women, is all about messing with their minds—it’s an antidepressant drug.

And it only gets worse. Addyi, an antidepressant drug, was designed to “treat” the so-called mental disorder, Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD), or female sexual interest/arousal disorder. In short, this drug approval not only suggests, but supports, the absurd notion that women, for any number of reasons, who do not seek sexual arousal, are somehow suffering from a mental illness.

“Addyi” reportedly increases the brain chemicals dopamine and noradrenalin, while at the same time reducing Serotonin and, voila, increased sexual desire is achieved. It all sounds scientific. A little chemical increase here, a reduction there, and the female libido is revved up and ready to go. But it’s not that simple and, in the case of the antidepressant, “Addyi,” there are some very serious, even life-threatening adverse reactions.

First though, as is the case with all antidepressants, no one has a clue how “Addyi” actually works in the brain to “treat” the alleged mental disorder HSDD and, according to the FDA advisory committee on the drug, “the precise mechanism of action by which flibanserin enhances sexual desire in patients with HSDD is not known.” What is known though is that while the FDA has approved “Addyi,” the federal agency is covering its actions by attaching serious drug oversight and warnings.

The clinical trial results were marginal at best—women taking “Addyi” experienced an increase of about 0.5 to 1 sexually satisfying events per month compared to women taking the placebo—and based on the results, the risks associated with “Addyi” could be far less pleasurable. For example, the FDA is requiring that “Addyi” carry its most serious “black box” warning, advising the drug should not be used by those who drink alcohol, as it increases the risk of severely low blood pressure (hypotension) and fainting (syncope). Other common side effects include dizziness, somnolence, nausea, fatigue, insomnia and dry mouth.

The FDA is so concerned about the possible adverse effects of “Addyi” on women that it is requiring doctors and pharmacists to watch an online presentation and pass a test of their understanding, literally becoming certified to prescribe and dispense the drug.

While most would agree that it is insulting and demeaning to suggest women suffer from a mental illness because of a lack of desire to participate in a sexual act, this isn’t the first time the FDA, with the help of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), has become an accomplice in what can only be described as disease mongering.

The APA decided by a show-of-hands vote that Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD), also known as PMS, is a mental disorder and pharmaceutical giant, Eli Lilly, jumped on the bandwagon repackaging its blockbuster antidepressant, Prozac, as a new “treatment” for PMDD called Sarafem.

There was nothing “new” about Sarafem, as there is literally no chemical difference between the antidepressants Prozac and Sarafem. Lilly simply changed the color of the pill from green to the very feminine pink and lavender and sold it as a new “treatment” for a nonexistent mental disorder. Like Prozac and Sarafem, the new pink “Addyi” is a thrice failed antidepressant repackaged as a first of its kind “treatment” for women “suffering” from the alleged mental illness of not wanting sex.

Beyond the known dangerous side effects associated with the antidepressant, “Addyi,” and the nonexistent mental disorder it alleges to “treat,” there are other questions that scream for answers, such as who decides what is the “normal” number of sexual encounters a woman may desire? And, if a woman desires less sex than others, does that require chemically altering the brain?

There have long been obvious differences between the sexual drive and desires of men and woman, comically revealed by Billy Crystal in the film City Slickers when he explained “women need a reason to have sex, men just need a place.” True or not, the use of dangerous mind-altering drugs to allegedly increase a woman’s sexual desire is simply a continuation of the FDA and APA’s history of pathologizing normal female behavior and it is a disservice to women, not a mental disorder.

Kelly Patricia O’Meara is an award-winning former investigative reporter for the Washington Times’ Insight Magazine, penning dozens of articles exposing the fraud of psychiatric diagnosis and the dangers of the psychiatric drugs—including her ground-breaking 1999 cover story, “Guns & Doses,” exposing the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence. She is also the author of the highly acclaimed book, Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills that Kill. Prior to working as an investigative journalist, O’Meara spent sixteen years on Capitol Hill as a congressional staffer to four Members of Congress. She holds a B.S. in Political Science from the University of Maryland.


* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Everyone knows that if it was shown in a movie it is true, well except for Going Clear.
 
Well, to some extent it is supposed to have "mind affecting properties." Unlike Viagra for men, the purpose of this new drug is not to cure erectile dysfunction (duh). The purpose is to help women who believe they have a problem with arousal, and for whatever reason want to feel more aroused or often aroused.

I guess the problem is caused by the FDA Storm Troupers who SWAT raid houses, hold guns to women's heads, and force them to take the drug.

I get a little bit of cog. dis. about it.

A drug to make a person want something.

Don't want sex. I get how it could be a problem, but to many, it would be more an opportunity to do the other things you want to do.

Partner or someone, wants sex, but 'I' don't. Yeeeeeaaaaaaaaaah....ummmmm
Partner wants me to buy him more stuff. Take a 'want to buy stuff' pill.

I saw this non arousal thing referred to as a 'disorder' somewhere.
Not being horny? :unsure:
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
I get a little bit of cog. dis. about it.

A drug to make a person want something.

Don't want sex. I get how it could be a problem, but to many, it would be more an opportunity to do the other things you want to do.

Partner or someone, wants sex, but 'I' don't. Yeeeeeaaaaaaaaaah....ummmmm
Partner wants me to buy him more stuff. Take a 'want to buy stuff' pill.

I saw this non arousal thing referred to as a 'disorder' somewhere.
Not being horny? :unsure:
I wish some of the women on ESMB would contribute to this thread.

FWIW, and I know this is anecdotal and far from scientific, but I've known some women who after going through menopause experienced a lessening of sexual desire and missed it. It was a loss. And it was NOT to satisfy a partner. It for themselves. I think it was a memory of a pleasure that they no longer felt, or felt to the same degree or with the same frequency.

It might be different if the woman had never experienced a certain level or frequency of desire, and as a result had no sense of loss.

Ultimately, it is up to each particular woman to decide if something is wrong, or non-optimal, or could be better. It is her decision.

My take on it is it is irrelevant whether something is labeled a "disease" or a "disorder." As one gets older, deteriorating eyesight is the most common thing in the world, and indeed quite natural. Does that mean people shouldn't wear glasses? I think the questions are: (1) is it something that can make people's lives better? ; (2) is it entirely voluntary? and (3) does it meet the FDA standards re: both safety and effectiveness?
 
Last edited:
I wish some of the women on ESMB would contribute to this thread.

FWIW, and I know this is anecdotal and far from scientific, but I've known some women who after going through menopause experienced a lessening of sexual desire and missed it. It was a loss. And it was NOT to satisfy a partner. It for themselves. I think it was a memory of a pleasure that they no longer felt, or felt to the same degree or with the same frequency.

It might be different if the woman had never experienced a certain level or frequency of desire, and as a result had no sense of loss.

Ultimately, it is up to each particular woman do decide if something is wrong, or non-optimal, or could be better. It is her decision.

My take on it is it is irrelevant whether something is labeled a "disease" or a "disorder." As one gets older, deteriorating eyesight is the most common thing in the world, and indeed quite natural. Does that mean people shouldn't wear glasses? I think the questions are: (1) is it something that can people's lives better? ; (2) is it entirely voluntary? and (3) does it meet the FDA standards re: both safety and effectiveness?

I agree to what you are saying.

Just one note: this particular drug is not for post-menopausal women.

But doctors will probably prescribe it to any women who asks.

Another point I'd like to make is if there are any ESMB women who intend to use this drug, could I get your phone numbers? (I kid the ladies)

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

catarina

PTS Type III
I wish some of the women on ESMB would contribute to this thread.

:surprise1:

Since I have experience of chemical experiments and sexual interest... I have taken several psych meds, and some, especially SSRIs such as Prozac, and those anti-psychotics that increase the level of prolactine (a hormone), can really make you dull. But it wasn't like the sex drive just went away and I never thought about it, I had this good man in my house and I really wanted to want to, except the body would not respond, and it was all very strange and frustrating. Or with some meds, I could get still excited, but a happy end would be nowhere in sight, which was of course also frustrating.

Then occasionally, some med would have the opposite effect. :p

I had to quit the annoying meds for other reasons, but I'm quite certain I would not have wanted to live like that year after year anyway.

When it comes to this new drug, it doesn't appeal to me much, while potential side effects sound pretty much on par with what I'm used to, I do want a glass of champagne now and then. When judging side effects, you of course also have to judge how serious the condition is that you are trying to treat. I take some heavy shit but that's to stay alive. Just to get laid... but then every person has to decide that for themselves. (It's probably a moot point for me anyway, since the new drug is unlikely to play well with my brain.)

Since I did have those experiences of chemicals both reducing and boosting sex drive, I'm sure that can be done, but it seems far too complicated for a first line solution.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
...

Wouldn't it be really cool if. . .

Tom Cruise was invited back on a talk show by host Matt Lauer, ostensibly to bury the hatchet.

But 30 seconds into the interview (while plugging his movie) Cruise suddenly stops grinning & cackling when Matt announces maybe he will take his new girlfriend to see the movie---and Brooke Shields walks out!

The crowd gasps and applauds. She sits down next to Matt and snuggles up.

BROOKE SHIELDS
Oh, hi Tom. I didn't know you were going
to be on the show today!

CRUISE
Yeah, I mean, um...it's--surprising.

MATT LAUER
Hey, Cruise, we wanted to talk about the new
'Viagra for Women' drug,
whadya think about it?

CRUISE
I...um..it's just that....a drug? Is that a good idea?

BROOKE SHIELDS
Oh Tom don't go all cult crazy on us again. LOL
Ya know, I've been taking the 'Viagra for Women' and
Matt and I are having wild sex 2-3 times every night? How's
your sex life these days? LOL

CRUISE
I don't have a 2D in pt.

MATT LAUER
Huhhh? A tooty in pee tea?
That sounds kinda kinky...

CRUISE
Look, I don't want to get into enturbulation
with you people again--and freak out the public.
Let's just keep it simple and clear your MUs.
You people got any clay around here?


 
Last edited:

JustSheila

Crusader
Here is what Forbes says about it:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegw...proves-addyi-but-it-is-not-the-female-viagra/

For starters, Forbes makes it clear that calling Addyi "the female viagra" was way off base.

All jokes aside, a couple of years ago I went through a bad spell, saw a doctor and ended up trying several antidepressants. The first was given to me by the doctor as a combination antidepressant and (in her description) "alternative hormone replacement." It wasn't Addyi, but maybe something like it. This was in Australia.

I took it for about three weeks and quit because it made me feel so dull. Perhaps not long enough to get the full effect, but also not long enough to worry much about tapering off. When I tried other antidepressants that had worked well for me in the past, they all had a similar effect.

It's interesting that at different ages, anti-depressants can have very different effects. The doctor and I came to the conclusions that antidepressants were not right for me, which led to other tests and it finally all got figured that my problem actually stemmed from something physical. Though I don't currently take anything, if this sort of spell recurs, I now know exacty why and what to do about it. In past years, if I were depressed, the anti-depressants were like a miracle: my thinking became sharp and clear, plenty of energy and feeling great. They don't do that anymore for me. Weird.

On the "alternative hormone replacement" antidepressant, I never noticed any change in desire for sex. It was just another antidepressant. But I can see how a doctor might prescribe it to a woman who has all the symptoms of depression but her only complaint is lack of interest in sex. Sure, in some women that may be caused by depression.

IMHO, it's just a new spin to antidepressants, with an added ingredient toted to help your sex life which actually doesn't have that effect on many women at all.
 

cleared cannibal

Silver Meritorious Patron
I can foresee a situation where a man gives it to his significant other w/o her knowledge.

This sure would eliminate any placebo effect.
 

catarina

PTS Type III
Beer works better, anyway.

I believe there are many simple things (beer is one) you can try to get in the mood before turning to pharmaceuticals. Sometimes it's probably hormones, but I think stress might be a bigger libido killer.
 

prosecco

Patron Meritorious
The CCHR article was really irritating, as if they are trailblazers for female issues, although it had all the hallmarks of a CCHR campaign, namely sex, female sexuality and that old chestnut, 'psych drugs...'

Oh I don't know, I'm at that stage of my life where my life is work, juggle childcare/sick kids, meals, feed family and others, work in community/fundraising for worthwhile cause, so watching an episode of House of Cards, and a glass of wine is about my speed.
 

JustSheila

Crusader
Yeh, Prosecco, I felt the same way. The crazy, exaggerated views that Scn have now are well beyond the 80s. Now, every time a new drug comes out, it's, "see, I told you! The psychs are trying to control mankind through drugs!" Such paranoid BS. :duh:

The drug is an anti-depressant and barely works to increase sex drive on any women at all. Big deal.

All the warnings for side-effects have to be mentioned on new drugs. ANY symptom ANY person experiences during a trial has to be noted, whether it's related to taking the drug or not.

The woman who wrote the article doesn't have a shred of a background in medical or pharmaceuticals, which is why I brought up her one diploma - political science. Of course she'd be a natural for spinning stories to fit Scientology's political agenda.

So what were you saying about wine?

6a00e54f9234088833015433e47b4a970c.jpg


Cheers!
 

SPsince83

Gold Meritorious Patron
Yeh, Prosecco, I felt the same way. The crazy, exaggerated views that Scn have now are well beyond the 80s. Now, every time a new drug comes out, it's, "see, I told you! The psychs are trying to control mankind through drugs!" Such paranoid BS. :duh:

The drug is an anti-depressant and barely works to increase sex drive on any women at all. Big deal.

All the warnings for side-effects have to be mentioned on new drugs. ANY symptom ANY person experiences during a trial has to be noted, whether it's related to taking the drug or not.

The woman who wrote the article doesn't have a shred of a background in medical or pharmaceuticals, which is why I brought up her one diploma - political science. Of course she'd be a natural for spinning stories to fit Scientology's political agenda.

So what were you saying about wine?

6a00e54f9234088833015433e47b4a970c.jpg


Cheers!

Back in the 70s when the Davis Missions were hot, we had quite a few staff who actually graduated from UC Davis. Amazing how many had their BS in Poli Sci. At least two of the Body Regs I knew had that degree. Oh, yeah, and Bruce Wiseman was on Davis staff. His wife did my objectives.
 
Top