Sexual Dysfunction: Men are not alone

According to the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Sexual Female Dysfunction (FSD) can be physical or psychological causes that can keep women from enjoying sex. It can range from lack of desire to painful intercourse. It's advised to seek a "health provider" if sexual functions cause distress for you or your partner for longer than several months.

Here come the complaints. People (women) are concerned as to why there are substances men can take, but why there aren't any for women. For example, Levitra is for men with Erectile Dysfunction. Women now want a "viagra for women." The difficulty here is actually understanding the problem behind female versus male sexual dysfunction.

FSD may exist, but the solutions or treatments for it vary a great deal when compared to men. According to MayoClinic.com, "viagra for women" doesn't necessarily exist or is proven very efficient because arousal issues for women can't easily be treated with just a pill. There are many other factors both psychologically and physically that affect women's ability to enjoy sex.

This is where marketing to uninformed women takes play. If people didn't do research on their own, they wouldn't realize that commercials such as Lexafem may not actually work as well as the company hypes it to. According the Lexafem website (lexafem.com), it's a pill that is supposed to:

1. Deeply intensifying sexual sensations
2. Increasing vaginal lubrication
3. Speeding total body arousal
4. Adding passion back to your intimate encounters
5. And putting regular, pleasurable orgasms back within your grasp!
   

Did they forget to take into consideration that these women might possibly be emotionally distressed, or that some even may be severely depressed? Their magical pill probably doesn't have antidepressants or anything along those lines. Therefore, it'll probably only work for a portion of the female population with FSD. They of course don't tell these women that there are other factors to take into consideration.

(http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/viagra-for-women/AN01987/METHOD=print)

Marketing to women who don't fully understand what's wrong with them is their way of making profit. Reading or watching commercials about what could possibly be the reason you're not having a fantastic time in bed could make anyone if not everyone wonder if they have FSD too. And if the solution is as easy as it is for men, why not give it some credit, right? Not. People have to keep in mind that these companies are out for their benefit, not ours. It's only $60/month ... we can all afford to give up that much on a hunch right? ... Not all of us. Okay, honestly ... the majority of us can't. But since "putting regular, pleasurable orgasms back within your grasp!" sounds so tempting, there are plenty of women who would fall into their trap.

This video is a perfect example of what people should know before jumping on any bandwagon.

- Paulina

Is it just mood swings, or is it depression ?

Depressed? It is a commonly overused and underestimated word. Most people don't fully understand the severity of depression. It isn't just being sad for a few days in a row, then suddenly you're feeling better again.

Depression isn't something that people can easily snap out of in just a blink of an eye. It's an actual medical condition that needs to be treated before it worsens. The brain is not only in an imbalance, but going untreated will make life utterly miserable and distraught as a whole.

"Abilify (aripiprazole) is an antipsychotic medication. It works by changing the actions of chemicals in the brain." It has been marketed to the public as one of the number one ways to treat depression. The commercials seem so convincing. However, what they failed to mention was that this medicine also treats for other severe conditions.

This product is used to treat the "symptoms of psychotic conditions such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder (manic depression)." These are serious conditions that the average, everyday person does not have nor do they actually understand how serious these psychological cases actually are. Abilify is also used together with other medications to treat major depressive disorder in adults, as well as irritability and symptoms of aggression, mood swings, temper tantrums, and self-injury related to autistic disorder in children who are at least 6 years old.

(Read more: http://www.drugs.com/abilify.html#ixzz0lw1qlqsD)




The way this company goes by advertising to consumers is that this is a simple solution to a very common, but dangerous disorder. However, there are so many side effects and unknown circumstances that aren't addressed or elaborated in their minute-long commercials. For example, it may be harmful to unborn babies... but they don't actually know what exactly might happen to your baby? That's reassuring. All it says is to tell your doctor first. So, you're back at square one again if you can't take this drug for that reason or any other reason in their ginormous list of possible side effects.

This is why consumers need to do research on their own. Doctors are also paid by pharmaceutical companies, so people have to realize that they can of course take their doctor's advice... but with a grain of salt.

- Paulina

.

Itchy Legs

Restless Leg Syndrom (RLS) is a very real and uncomfortable disorder, but not necessarily life-threatening.The condition makes you feel a compelling, uncomfortable urge to move your legs. But does this require medication? For some people, these symptoms are just temporary episodes of everyday life. But for others, the symptoms are severe enough to be abnormally discomforting and can cause other problems. Usually RLS is prone to occur at night, keeping them from sleeping. Not getting enough sleep can lower their immune systems, making them more vulnerable to other illnesses... and you get the picture. So, helping people with RLS get treatment is a good thing, but convincing perfectly healthy people that they are sick is not. These healthy people are running the risk of getting hurt from unnecessary treatment from experiencing side effects that bury any prospective benefit.

My close friend from high school was diagnosed with RLS during our junior year. In junior high school, we played softball together and in high school we both played on the lacrosse team. Along with RLS, she struggled constantly with shin splints. These two conditions brought her extreme pain and discomfort through out our athletic seasons. Before every practice, I would help stretch her calves and hamstrings to relieve some of the discomfort. At the time, I had always wondered if there was any kind of medication or therapy that she could do to ease the pain. When I finally asked her about it, she told me there was no cure for her RLS and that the drug treatments offered aren't very safe.

Earlier this semester, I was assigned homework to watch the local news for any examples of pharmaceutical medicalization. As mentioned in the last post, I saw three drug-related commercials where one was advertising Requip, a drug for RLS. Seeing the commercial reminded me of my friend's condition and her caution in taking treatment drugs. I was under the impression that treatments didn't really exist, so this commercial surprised me. The ad seemed promising and helpful... at first. The issue with the ad lies with the drug, Requip, and the way it is presented. The 3-minute ad vaguely describes RLS as “a strange sensation,” obscure enough that almost anyone can walk away from the commercial wondering if they have it. It also briefly mentions the side effects and doesn't go into much detail about it. What the ad fails to mention, is that Requip is a drug that was originally developed for Parkinson’s disease and because of this, it may not decrease the symptoms but could instead cause other side affects, like daytime sleepiness, nausea, lightheadedness, and fatigue. Also, this drug is not the only way to relieve symptoms. There are other cheaper options that do not necessarily require medication. Treating the underlying conditions, such as iron deficiency or peripheral neuropathy, is proven to be effective. Overall, the advertisement does not hold true for the interest of the patient. It holds back information about the drug that would be helpful in choosing whether or not to take it. This is abuse of medicalization and is the root of societal distrust in drug companies.

So what's the lesson here? Look out for those tricky drug commercials and do not be easily convinced!! Do some research online. Look to see what people (not drug companies) are saying about the drug. Discuss all aspects of the drug/your condition with your doctor before deciding to take it.

-Maryam G.

Selling Sickness

What is medicalization? Some people call it disease mongering for it's tendency to push the diagnostic boundaries of illness while promoting it publicly in the interest for financial/political profit. Others call it medical labeling, believing that it helps those in discomfort to live a happier, healthier life by offering a medical solution. So which one is it? Well, I don't think it has to be one or the other... I think it can be both. There are many definitions and methods to explain this societal concept, so let's start with a few.

Here's a definition by Laura Purdy from her article, Medicalization, Medical Necessity and Female Medicine. She describes it as “[a] problem in medical terms, using medical language to describe a problem, adopting a medical framework to understand a problem, or using medical information to ‘treat’ it” (Purdy, 2001). Personally, I think this definition makes sense. It is neutral and states medicalization as it is. With this, medicalization is just another a venue in providing a solution to a problem. But this definition is incomplete. It lacks a commonly criticized aspect...that medicalization actually creates more issues than it does relieving them.

Purdy quickly points out the neutrality in this definition and adds onto it with another definition from Jenna Sawicki. She says that medicalization “implies the negative phenomena of reducing political, personal, and societal issues to medical problems thereby giving scientific experts the power to ‘solve’ them within the constraints of medical practice" (Purdy, 2001). Leonore Tiefer (the author of FSD: A Case Study of Disease Mongering and Activist Resistance) takes Purdy's definitions and runs with it, depicting that medicalization is when individuals fail to meet societal expectations and or embody taboo conditions, they look for simple solutions, “[setting] the stage for disease mongering, a process that encourages the conversion of socially created anxiety into medical diagnoses suitable to pharmacological treatment” (Teifer, 2006).

Now a perpetrator is introduced into the definition; society. In the United States today, these perpetrators or forces of medicalization (typically drug companies) stand virtually unopposed and unrecognized for the economical, moral, and political interests they represent. We see manipulative television advertisements along with additional applications for already approved drugs and the creation of new diseases or disorders for the purpose of marketing a drug.

But just because pharmaceutical companies enjoy the financial gain from medicalization doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn’t use it. Many times the identification of a new disorder to disease is beneficial for those who suffer and are with out treatment, mainly because it offers hope for recovery and comfort. It is important to recognize that medicalization can be a good thing, but it must be used with integrity and for the interest of patients, and not as a tool for manipulation and economical or political profit.

Unfortunately, we see the manipulation of medical labeling more often than not. Watching the local news here in Tucson, I saw three drug related commercials. The first was offering pills for weight-loss, the second presented a patch for quitting smoking, and the third introduced a drug for restless leg syndrome. With the first two, there is immediately already an issue with the presented ‘problem’. Arguably, excess weight is a life style and choice, often associated with obesity. But the problem that can cause death is hypertension and cardiovascular disease, not excess weight. The same thing arises with smoking because it is a choice, a lifestyle that causes health complications. The restless leg syndrome ad caught my attention because my close friend had just been diagnosed with it. Restless leg syndrome (RLS) is a very real and uncomfortable disorder, but not necessarily a serious, life-threatening situation.

A common question and argument arises – should the drug companies be stopped from abusing medicalization? Technically, the drug companies have the freedom to express whatever they want, so instead there must be a way to both discredit the manipulation and to trust medicalization. In order to differentiate between the two uses of medical labeling, we must become aware of these propaganda techniques and intentions of many big drug companies, along with recognizing that there is a choice as to whether take the medicine or not. We must think critically and be aware of our options. This isn’t an easy task and will be challenging, and as Purdy says “will take a concerted effort by those with a variety of progressive agendas to change that culture to ‘use medicalization for genuine empowerment’” (Purdy, 2001). So, this blog will be an attempt to expose various propaganda techniques used by drug companies and to provide information about obscurely medicalized conditions. Enjoy!

-Maryam G