Surprising Health Benefits of Sex

Sexual Health

"When you're in the mood, it's a sure bet that the last thing on your mind is boosting your immune system or maintaining a healthy weight. Yet good sex offers those health benefits and more. That's a surprise to many people, says Joy Davidson, PhD, a New York psychologist and sex therapist. 'Of course, sex is everywhere in the media,' she says. 'But the idea that we are vital, sexual creatures is still looked at in some cases with disgust or in other cases a bit of embarrassment. So to really take a look at how our sexuality adds to our life and enhances our life and our health, both physical and psychological, is eye-opening for many people.'

Sex does a body good in a number of ways, according to Davidson and other experts. The benefits aren't just anecdotal or hearsay -- each of these health benefits of sex is backed by scientific scrutiny." *

Sex Relieves Stress

"A big health benefit of sex is lower blood pressure and overall stress reduction, according to researchers from Scotland who reported their findings in the journal Biological Psychology. They studied 24 women and 22 men who kept records of their sexual activity. Then the researchers subjected them to stressful situations -- such as speaking in public and doing verbal arithmetic -- and noted their blood pressure response to stress. Those who had intercourse had better responses to stress than those who engaged in other sexual behaviors or abstained."

Sex Lowers Blood Pressure

"Another study published in Biological Psychology found that frequent intercourse was associated with lower diastolic blood pressure (the lower, or second, number in a blood pressure reading). This study focused on people living with their sex partner.

Still further research found a link between partner hugs and lower blood pressure in women.

Elevated blood pressure is a risk factor for coronary artery disease, heart attack, kidney disease, and stroke."

Sex Boosts Immunity

"Good sexual health may mean better physical health. Having sex once or twice a week has been linked with higher levels of an antibody called immunoglobulin A or IgA, which can protect you from getting colds and other infections. Scientists at Wilkes University in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., took samples of saliva, which contain IgA, from 112 college students who reported the frequency of sex they had.

Those in the 'frequent' group -- once or twice a week -- had higher levels of IgA than those in the other three groups -- who reported being abstinent, having sex less than once a week, or having it very often, three or more times weekly."

Sex Counts As Exercise

"'Sex is a great mode of exercise,' says Patti Britton, PhD, a Los Angeles sexologist and president of the American Association of Sexuality Educators and Therapists. It takes work, from both a physical and psychological perspective, to do it well, she says.

The benefits of sex as a form of exercise are many - sex can improve your cardiovascular fitness, strength, flexibility, and balance, not to mention your emotional health."

Sex Burns Calories

"Thirty minutes of sex burns 85 calories or more. It may not sound like much, but it adds up: 42 half-hour sessions will burn 3,570 calories, more than enough to lose a pound. The number of calories burned during sex is about the same as the number burned by walking at 2 miles per hour.

Doubling up on the 30 minute sessions, you could drop that pound in 21 hour-long sessions."

Sex Improves Cardiovascular Health

"While some older folks may worry that the efforts expended during sex could cause a stroke, that's not so, according to researchers from England. In a study published in theJournal of Epidemiology and Community Health, scientists found that the frequency of sex was not associated with stroke in the 914 men they followed for 20 years.

And the heart health benefits of sex don't end there. The researchers also found that having sex twice or more a week reduced the risk of fatal heart attack by half for the men, compared with those who had sex less than once a month."

Sex Boosts Self-Esteem

"Boosting self-esteem was one of 237 reasons people have sex, collected by University of Texas researchers and published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior.

That finding makes sense to Gina Ogden, PhD, a sex therapist and marriage and family therapist in Cambridge, Mass., although she finds that those who already have self-esteem say they sometimes have sex to feel even better. 'One of the reasons people say they have sex is to feel good about themselves,' she tells WebMD. 'Great sex begins with self-esteem, and it raises it. If the sex is loving, connected, and what you want, it raises it.'"

Sex Strengthens Your Well-Being

"Sex, like any activity that fosters a close and loving connection to your partner, not only raises self-esteem, but strengthens your overall sense of well-being. Studies have shown that people with strong social support networks (which includes lovers) are healthier and happier than their less-connected peers." 

Sex Improves Intimacy

"Having sex and orgasms increases levels of the hormone oxytocin, the so-called love hormone, which helps us bond and build trust. Researchers from the University of Pittsburgh and the University of North Carolina evaluated 59 premenopausal women before and after warm contact with their husbands and partners ending with hugs. They found that the more contact, the higher the oxytocin levels.

'Oxytocin allows us to feel the urge to nurture and to bond,' Britton says.

Higher oxytocin has also been linked with a feeling of generosity. So if you're feeling suddenly more generous toward your partner than usual, credit the love hormone." 

Sex Reduces Pain

"As the hormone oxytocin surges, endorphins increase, and pain declines. So if your headache, arthritis pain, or PMS symptoms seem to improve after sex, you can thank those higher oxytocin levels.

Oxytocin – The Love Hormone

"A study published in the Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine examined the response of the 'love hormone' oxytocin on pain perception in an experiment with 48 volunteers. Study participants inhaled oxytocin vapor and then had their fingers pricked. Those who had inhaled oxytocin lowered their pain threshold by more than half."

Sex Reduces Prostate Cancer Risk

"Frequent ejaculations, especially in 20-something men, may reduce the risk of prostate cancer later in life, Australian researchers reported in the British Journal of Urology International. When they followed men diagnosed with prostate cancer and those without, they found no association of prostate cancer with the number of sexual partners as the men reached their 30s, 40s, and 50s.

But they found men who had five or more ejaculations weekly while in their 20s reduced their risk of getting prostate cancer later by a third.

Another study, reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that frequent ejaculations, 21 or more a month, were linked to lower prostate cancer risk in older men, as well, compared with less frequent ejaculations of four to seven monthly."

Sex Strengthens Pelvic Floor Muscles

"For women, doing a few pelvic floor muscle exercises known as Kegel exercises during sex offers a couple of benefits. You will enjoy more pleasure, and you'll also strengthen the area and help to minimize the risk of incontinence later in life.

To do a basic Kegel exercise, tighten the muscles of your pelvic floor, as if you're trying to stop the flow of urine. Count to three, then release."

Additional Benefits of Kegel Exercises

"Kegel exercises have a number of proven health benefits in addition to making sex more enjoyable. The strengthening of the pelvic floor muscles can help prevent prolapse (a slipping out of position) of the vagina, uterus, and bladder. Pelvic floor muscles may be weakened later in life as a result of childbearing, being overweight, and aging. Kegel exercises help offset the consequences of weakened pelvic floor muscles."

Sex Helps You Sleep Better

"The oxytocin released during orgasm also promotes sleep, according to research.

And getting enough sleep has been linked with a host of other good things, such as maintaining a healthy weight and blood pressure. Something to think about, especially if you've been wondering why your guy can be active one minute and snoring the next."

Sex As Physical Exercise Also Promotes Sleep

"The physical exercise component of sex can also help you relax and sleep better, in addition to the hormonal effects. People who get regular exercise tend to sleep better and have more restful sleep. Moreover, as we have seen in the earlier part of this slideshow, sex is a great way to get some exercise." 

Summary

"Take note that sex is good for you in ways you may never have imagined and that the health benefits extend well beyond the bedroom."

Continue to Read more ...

Scientists use 'arousometer' to measure what turns off women most

Scientists have taken the first biological measure of sexual arousal in women experiencing disgust, and found that feelings of disgust are a bigger turn-off than feelings of fear.

The "arousometer" was a vaginal photoplethysmograph - a clear acrylic tampon-shaped device to measure genital blood flow.

Using a device inserted into women to measure genital blood flow as a gauge of sexual arousal, Diana Fleischman, PhD, an evolutionary psychologist at the UK's University of Portsmouth, investigated 76 heterosexual women aged between 18 and 42 years.

The findings, which also measured the women's self-reported feelings, are published in the online journal PLOS One.

Dr. Fleischman says: "Sex includes increased contact with body odors and fluids which, in other contexts, strongly suggest disease and would elicit disgust.

"Women are more vulnerable to contracting diseases through sex than men and show worse outcomes once infected, so we should expect that women will be especially turned off when they are disgusted."

One group of women in the study were shown disgusting images before watching an erotic film. The second group watched an erotic film and were then shown disgusting images.

The third group were shown frightening images before watching an erotic film. And the fourth watched an erotic film and were then shown frightening images.

Images used to elicit disgust in the women included diseased or injured humans and human corpses, feces and people vomiting. The images designed to elicit fear included violent people, dangerous animals, weapons, heights, tornados and fire.

The erotic films were intended to be sexually appealing specifically to women and were produced and directed by women.

Before the experiments, all the women were asked to insert a vaginal photoplethysmograph - a clear acrylic tampon-shaped device that measures blood flow to the vagina as an indication of sexual arousal. They were also asked to report their own degree of arousal, disgust and fear after their tests.

Women exposed to disgusting images before watching an erotic film were three times less sexually aroused than those who had seen frightening images or those in the control group.

Overcoming disgust to have sex

Dr. Fleischman says: "It makes sense that sexual arousal and disgust would affect one another. Sexual arousal motivates us toward closeness with others and their bodies while disgust motivates us away." He adds:

"Given these competing motivations, every one of our ancestors had to overcome disgust in order to have sexual contact and reproduce."

The researchers found that previous evidence was mixed on the question of whether sexual arousal decreases feeling of disgust in women.

A consistent difference has been found between men and women: men are less sensitive to disgust when it comes to sex.

"Previous studies have found that men and women who are exposed to sexually explicit images report less disgust," Dr. Fleischman explains. "However, our study is the first to measure blood flow to the genitals, which is necessary for sexual arousal, and how it interacts with disgust."

The research found that women who are not very sensitive to feelings of disgust reduce their sensitivity further when sexually aroused.

By contrast, women who are highly disgust-sensitive show greater disgust when they are sexually aroused.

Dr Fleischman says: "When we are deciding whether to have sex, there are trade-offs to consider. On the one hand you must have sex to reproduce, and on the other hand sexual encounters are risky for disease transmission.

"What our results suggest is that the story is more complicated for women and that women differ in how sexual arousal changes their disgust response."

Continue to Read more ...

Homely men who misbehave can't win for losing: Attractiveness influences online daters, jurors

Women tolerate an unattractive man up to a point, but beware if he misbehaves. Then they'll easily shun him, researchers report, after finding that a woman's view of a man is influenced by how handsome and law-abiding he is. Their study, they say, has significance for those using dating sites or doing jury duty.

Women tolerate an unattractive man up to a point, but beware if he misbehaves. Then they'll easily shun him. So say Jeremy Gibson and Jonathan Gore of the Eastern Kentucky University in the US, after finding that a woman's view of a man is influenced by how handsome and law-abiding he is. Their study in Springer's journal Gender Issues has significance for those using dating sites or doing jury duty.

Discovering how someone can make a positive first impression is an important field of study because of its role in forming relationships. It is often based on physical appearance and whether someone sticks to social norms or not. Such impressions are made in a flash, but are not always correct. In what is called the "halo effect," people warm up to others with positive characteristics, such as handsomeness. The "devil effect" or "negative halo effect" comes into play when people assume that others possess so-called "bad" characteristics, based on traits such as unattractiveness..

Gibson and Gore tested if and how levels of attractiveness and conforming to social norms combine to influence 170 college women's perceptions of men. Two male faces -- one attractive, the other not -- bearing similar features were paired in two written scenarios. In the one, the man committed a major social no-no, in the other not.

The researchers found that whether a man transgressed a social norm was a much greater put-off than whether he was unattractive. Normally women do not feel differently towards a homely man who toes the line. If that same ugly duckling, however, transgresses the boundaries of right or wrong, a magnified or "double" devil effect comes into play. He is then viewed in an extremely negative light, much more so than would have been the case if he were handsome.

"The unattractive male is tolerated up to a point; his unattractiveness is OK until he misbehaves," says Gibson.

The halo and devil effect often comes into play when people view others' profiles on online dating sites. Based on their results, Gibson and Gore believe that unattractive men who provide unusual or alarming information in their profiles may not receive a second glance from women. This will not be the case for an Adonis posting the same information, or unattractive ones who do not violate these norms. In the judicial system, unattractive defendants are also known to receive more severe penalties than more attractive ones, even if they committed the same crime.

"A man who stands trial has already shown himself to have violated social norms in one way or another. If he is also unattractive, the magnified devil effect may result in a larger fine or sentence, as it could influence how negatively jurors view him and, as a result, the degree to which they believe him guilty of the crime," explains Gore.

---

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Springer Science+Business Media. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

---

Journal Reference:

1. Jeremy L. Gibson, Jonathan S. Gore. You’re OK Until You Misbehave: How Norm Violations Magnify the Attractiveness Devil Effect.Gender Issues, 2015; DOI: 10.1007/s12147-015-9142-5

Continue to Read more ...

10 Most Common Birth Control Pill Side Effects

The oral contraceptive pill, commonly referred to as "the pill," is a form of hormonal contraception taken by approximately 12 million women in the United States each year to prevent pregnancy.¹

The pill is a highly effective method of birth control when taken correctly.¹

Each year, 8% of women experience an unintended pregnancy while taking the pill - most commonly because they forgot to take it.

However, when taken daily at the same time, only one in 100 women will experience an unintended pregnancy within the first year of pill use.¹

There are two types of contraceptive pills, both of which contain synthetic hormones estrogen and progesterone.² Combination pills contain both hormones estrogen and progesterone whereas the "mini pill" known as the progestin-only pill contains only the hormone progestin.¹

The pill can also be taken for non-contraceptive protection to treat medical conditions such as:^2,3

"The pill" is a type of hormonal contraception that is taken by around 12 million women per year in the US to prevent pregnancy.

• Regulation of menstrual periods
• Irregular periods
• Menorrhagia (heavy periods)
• Dysmenorrhea (painful periods)
• Endometriosis
• Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD)
• Acne, hirsutism (excess hair growth) and alopecia (hair loss)
• Decreasing the risk of breast cysts, ovarian cysts, pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and pregnancies in the fallopian tubes.

Oral contraceptives are also used as a method to prevent ovarian and endometrial cancers. Birth control pills do not prevent sexually transmitted diseases.^1-3

Common birth control side effects

The 10 most common side effects of oral contraceptives are:

1. Intermenstrual spotting: vaginal bleeding between your expected periods is experienced by approximately 50% of women using the pill, most commonly within the first 3 months of initiating the pill. Generally, this resolves in over 90% of women by their third pill pack. During this time of spotting, the pill is still effective as long as the pill has been taken correctly and none were missed. It is recommended that you contact your medical provider if you experience 5 or more days of bleeding while on your active pills or heavy bleeding for 3 or more days.³
2. Nausea: mild nausea when initially starting the pill can occur. However, nausea symptoms usually resolve over a short period of time. One solution is to try taking your pill with food or at bedtime. Seek medical help if the nausea is severe or persistent.³
3. Breast tenderness: birth control pills may cause your breasts to enlarge or become tender, which tends to improve after the first few weeks of starting the pill. However, if there is a presence of a lump or the pain is not going away, seek medical help. Reducing caffeine and salt intake can decrease breast tenderness, as can wearing a supportive bra.³
4. Headaches: the onset of new headaches should be brought to the attention of your medical provider.³
5. Weight gain: despite the failure of clinical studies to reveal that birth control pills cause weight fluctuations, some women do experience some fluid retention, especially in the breast and hip areas.³
6. Mood changes: if you are someone who has a history of depression, it is important that this is discussed with your medical provider - some women do experience depression or other emotional changes while taking the pill. It is important to contact your medical provider if you are experiencing mood changes during pill use.³
7. Missed periods: there are times when despite proper pill use, a period may be skipped or missed. Several factors can influence this such as outside stress, illness, travel or at times hormonal and or thyroid abnormalities. If a period is missed or is very light while on the pill, take a pregnancy test prior to taking your next pack of pills and call your medical provider if this continues.³
8. Decreased libido: the pill can affect your sex drive because of the hormones found in them. However, other outside factors may also cause a decrease in your libido. If this is persistent or bothersome, inform your medical provider.³
9. Vaginal discharge: some women may notice changes in vaginal discharge ranging from an overall increase to a decrease in vaginal lubrication with intercourse. Speak with your medical provider if you are concerned that there is the presence of an infection.
10. Visual changes with contact lenses: you should see your ophthalmologist if you are a contact lens wearer and notice some changes in vision or with lens tolerance during pill use.³

Some women experience side effects with "the pill" such as irregular periods, nausea, headaches, or weight change.

If you experience the side effects with the acronym "ACHES" (see below), contact your medical provider or visit an emergency room immediately as they may signify a serious condition.^3,4

• A: Abdominal/stomach pain
• C: Chest pain (as well as shortness of breath)
• H: Headaches, which are severe
• E: Eye problems such as blurred vision/loss of vision
• S: Swelling/aching in the legs and thighs (also redness, swelling or pain in the calf or thighs).

Birth control pills have also been associated with an increase in blood pressure, benign liver tumors, and a slight increase in the risk of developing cervical cancer.³

Precautions and risks while taking the pill

Combination pills do come with a particular risk for cardiovascular side effects such as heart attack, stroke and blood clots - which at times can be fatal. While blood clots are rare, they can occur. For women with a history of blood clots, heart attacks or stroke, it is advised that they do not take the combination birth control pill and speak with their medical provider about using an alternative method.¹

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advises against the use of combination pills in women aged 35 years or older that smoke. Additional factors that increase your risk of blood clots include obesity or a family history of heart disease.¹

It is not recommended to take hormonal contraceptives if you have a personal history of liver or heart disease, uterine or breast cancer, uncontrolled blood pressure or migraines with an aura.⁴

It is important to note that combination pills with the form of synthetic progesterone called drospirenonone may have a higher risk of blood clots including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.^1,4

You should speak with your medical provider to see what type of birth control option is best for you.

Continue to Read more ...

Will 'the female Viagra' really help women?

Later today, a committee of advisors to the Food and Drug Administration will vote on whether or not the agency should approve flibanserin - the much-hyped yet controversial "female Viagra." However, the drug has already been rejected twice previously by the organization, who cite safety concerns. In the wake of those decisions, battle lines have been drawn between those who feel the agency is discriminating against the sexual health of women and those who feel the language of sexual equality has been hijacked in an attempt to force an ineffective and unsafe drug on the market. We take a look at both sides of this dramatic debate.

Campaigners for flibanserin claim that 26 drugs have been FDA-approved for male sexual dysfunction and none for women.

480 was not a viable angina treatment, Pfizer took an interest instead in its unintended effects. As a treatment for erectile dysfunction, UK-92480 was much more effective than a placebo. In 1998, the drug was approved for this use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and it was rechristened Viagra.

In the 17 years since, drugs acting as variations on Viagra's mechanism have also made it to market as erectile dysfunction treatments. What has been conspicuous in its absence, however, has been "a Viagra for women."

Following the FDA's second decision not to approve flibanserin, in fall 2014, two well-funded media campaigns - Even The Score and Women Deserve - set about engaging women's groups, starting up petitions and lobbying policymakers on the issue. A mantra of these campaigns is the figure "26-0."

What 26-0 relates to is a claim made by Cindy Whitehead, the CEO of Sprout Pharmaceuticals (who now own flibanserin) - and reportedly the creative mind behind Even The Score and Women Deserve - that 26 drugs have been FDA-approved for male sexual dysfunction and none for women.

Watch Women Deserve's Viagra parody video below:

"Women have waited long enough," write Even The Score, of their pro-flibanserin petition, which is reported to have attracted more than 40,000 signatures. "In 2015, gender equality should be the standard when it comes to access to treatments for sexual dysfunction."

Accusations of data manipulation

However, critics have claimed that Even The Score's campaign is built on misinformation. The 26 products for male sexual dysfunction are actually different regional brands of the four main erectile dysfunction treatments, which themselves adhere to a similar mechanism.

Do 43% of American women really have a sexual dysfunction?

Another statistic wielded by the campaigns - the claim that 43% of American women have a sexual dysfunction - has also come under fire. The figure is drawn from a contentious 1994 survey that gave its female respondents the option of answering yes or no to whether they had any sort of sexual problem, but the survey did not collect any data on what the nature of the problem was - even the senior author of that study has reportedly claimed the statistic is misused.

A claim published on womendeserve.org that "a biological lack of desire to have sex negatively impacts 1 in 10 American women" was questioned in a high-profile LA Times piece by Kinsey Institute research fellow and sexologist Prof. Ellen Laan, and Leonore Tiefer, professor of psychiatry at NYU School of Medicine and founder of the New View Campaign.

"No diagnostic test has identified any biological cause - brain, hormone, genital blood flow - for most women's sexual problems," the pair wrote. Rather, they claim that low sexual desire in women more likely reflects a difference in desire between the two partners.

"It is unethical and unscientific to attribute a couple's discrepancy in desire to the woman's biological deficit," they continue, pointing out that studies have shown women's response to both test medications and placebo drugs is high. "These repeated findings do not support the 'unmet medical need' theory."

What Laan and Tiefer's article and the New View Campaign emphasize is that Viagra and flibanserin are false equivalents. Viagra treats erectile dysfunction, while Sprout claim that flibanserin is an antidote for low sexual desire in women. Viagra does not increase male libido; rather it acts on the mechanism that allows an erection to happen.

What flibanserin is concerned with - boosting sexual desire - is more amorphous and complex. New View even argue that male and female sexual dysfunctions are also not equivalents, so a female Viagra would therefore not be appropriate for women.

'Hypoactive sexual desire disorder' and the DSM

The New View Campaign take issue with the current sexual dysfunction classification implemented by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in its 1980 edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Disorders (DSM), which envisions male and sexual "dysfunction" as equivalents across four categories: sexual desire disorders, sexual arousal disorders, orgasmic disorders and sexual pain disorders.

The illness that flibanserin is purported to treat - hypoactive sexual desire disorder - was removed from the DSM in 2013.

They consider that this has led to a reductive, mechanistic perception of how female sexuality works in relation to male sexuality. They argue that women's sexual problems are less physiological and genital-focused than men's, that "women generally do not separate 'desire' from 'arousal,' women care less about physical than subjective arousal, and women's sexual complaints frequently focus on 'difficulties' that are absent from the DSM."

"The DSM takes an exclusively individual approach to sex, and assumes that if the sexual parts work, there is no problem; and if the parts don't work, there is a problem," summarize the campaigners.

Instead, the campaigners say, it has fostered a commercial drive to produce "a female Viagra" - a pharma sensation that will repeat the massive success of that drug for a new audience, regardless of whether pharmacology is the correct intervention, or to what extent there is a problem that requires treatment.

In fact, the specific illness that Sprout argue flibanserin treats - hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) - was removed from the DSM in 2013.

Medical News Today spoke to Thea Cacchioni, an assistant professor of women's studies at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, who testified against flibanserin the first time it was unsuccessfully submitted for FDA approval in 2010. She asserted bluntly of flibanserin's position in the modern pharmaceutical landscape: "there is no recognized illness it treats."

"There are many problems with the HSDD disorder, as I mentioned in the hearing," Cacchioni told us, "how could we ever come up with a baseline level of normal desire? Norms of desire vary from era to era and culture to culture. Also, research shows that most desire problems are caused by external factors - interpersonal, relationship issues, social judgements and pressures related to especially women's sexuality, feelings of inadequacy, work stress, etc."

As fascinating as the cases for and against the idea of a pharmaceutical intervention for female sexual dysfunction are, the issues that Cacchioni and others expressed the greatest concern about when testifying in 2010 were much less philosophical and more to do with hard data.

Does flibanserin work and is it safe?

Firstly, does flibanserin work? The evidence presented to the FDA was perceived as being somewhat subjective - clinical trial found that it produced an additional 0.7 "sexually satisfying events" per month.

Secondly, is flibanserin safe? The drug's clinical trials saw a 14% drop-out rate due to adverse effects. The full data were not reported on what these adverse effects were, but what is known is that women taking flibanserin had 10 times the risk of dizziness and four times the risk of sleepiness compared with a control group.

"These may sound minor," explained Cacchioni, "but since this drug was tested on a highly select group of women, there is concern over what would happen if a wide population of women take this drug on a daily basis? What drug interactions will we see? Is there a risk of impaired driving?"

Whether or not Sprout will be "third-time lucky" in today's quest for FDA approval hinges on new evidence the agency has requested the pharma company submit regarding the possibility of impaired driving.

Cacchioni, who has also written a book on the issue - "Big Pharma, Women, and the Labour of Love," out in August - is not convinced the new data will be enough to swing an FDA approval, despite the intense media attention and public interest the case has received.

"Clearly, Sprout is hiding something," she told us, "since they have followed up on this important request by submitting evidence from only 25 volunteer participants, 23 of whom are men! They claim they could not find any more women who were moderate drinkers."

She adds:

"I have faith that the FDA will stand its ground and not approve flibanserin. If they do, they are sending a very dangerous message - that drug companies and their marketing machines can pressure them into approving drugs that are unsafe and ineffective."

In a recent blog for Science 2.0, Josh Bloom - director of chemical and pharmaceutical sciences at The American Council on Science and Health in New York City, NY - says that while the statistical significance of improvement in sexual arousal was excellent in flibanserin's trial, a "statistically significant improvement in a study is not the same as a significant clinical improvement." He elaborates that, in terms of evidence of improvement, "there are no 10-fold differences as was the case with adverse effects. The differences in efficacy are roughly in the 1.5-fold range."

"Which brings up the exact same question that the FDA is faced with every time it decides whether a drug gets approved or not," Bloom writes. "Do the benefits outweigh the risks? The FDA has already said no three times. This should have been over with long ago."

So why are Sprout persisting with flibanserin? The company was founded in 2011 by Cindy and Robert Whitehead, who raised $50 million to save the drug from the scrapheap, after it was first declined by the FDA.

The drug's creators, the German pharma company Boehringer Ingelheim, gave up on flibanserin. Like Viagra, the drug was not developed to be a treatment for sexual dysfunction - it was a prospective antidepressant. Antidepressants that increase serotonin have a side effect of dampening sexual response. However, flibanserin seemed to improve it - possibly by raising the levels of the neurotransmitters dopamine and norepinephrine while decreasing serotonin.

Flibanserin as sexual equality battlefield

Sprout, via the Even The Score and Women Deserve campaigns - coordinated with the largely big pharma-funded International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health - have painted the battle to get flibanserin to market as an ideological struggle against a patriarchal and discriminatory regulatory system that is not fit for meeting the health needs of women.

Despite support from the National Council of Women's Organizations, the Black Women's Health Imperative, Jewish Women International and the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, the emotive pro-flibanserin campaign has not washed with everyone. Ellen Laan and Leonore Tiefer were scathing in their dismissal of its rhetoric:

"As professional sexologists and advocates of women's sexual rights, we were horrified by the campaigns' use and abuse of the language of equality to pressure the FDA to approve a potential billion-dollar blockbuster 'pink Viagra.' The only two drugs for women's sexual dysfunctions that have come to the FDA in the 16 years since Viagra was approved were rejected. [...] The drugs for women didn't work and were unsafe. Not approving them isn't sexism, it's proper regulation."

Cacchioni concurs, suggesting that perhaps the reason why no drugs have been shown to be safe or effective "is that most sexual problems are related to interpersonal, psychological, and social factors, including the social construction of sexual norms."

"Perhaps," she concludes, "we are putting too much pressure on ourselves to realize a level of desire that is not realistic for everyone across the life course."

With several FDA rejections and $50 million of investment already behind them, it will be interesting to see how Sprout and Even The Score will continue to frame the debate for "a female Viagra" if approval today is not forthcoming.

If it does succeed in winning approval, however, the Whiteheads could have a blockbuster drug on their hands with a market value of billions.

Continue to Read more ...

Does having more sex make you less happy?

 The suggestion that sex boosts happiness has been made time and time again both in research papers and popular writing on the subject, such as self-help books. Now, a new study from researchers at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, PA, goes against conventional wisdom to cast doubt on the theory that the more sex we have, the happier we are.

The researchers believe that the group instructed to have more sex reported lower levels of happiness because the couples were required to have more sex as part of the study, rather than them initiating it naturally.

In 2013, a study published in Social Indicators Researchfound that people reported steadily higher levels of happiness with increasing sexual frequency. And people who believed they were having less sex than their peers reported being less happy than those who believed they were having as much or more sex than their peers.

That study found that people who had sex once a week were 44% more likely to report a higher level of happiness compared with peers who had no sex in the previous year, and people who had sex up to three times a week were 55% more likely to report higher levels of happiness.

While the team behind the 2013 study used national survey data and statistical analyses to arrive at its conclusions, the Carnegie Mellon (CMU) researchers behind the new study recruited 128 healthy, married individuals between the ages of 35 and 65 who were in male-female couples in an attempt to investigate how sexual frequency affects happiness,.

The couples were randomly assigned into either a group that was asked to double the frequency of their weekly sexual intercourse or a group that received no instructions on sexual frequency.

At the start of the study - the results of which are published in the Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization - the participants completed surveys to establish baselines on health behaviors, happiness levels and occurrence, type and pleasure received from sex.

The couples also completed online questionnaires measuring these variables every day during the 3-month experimental period of the study. An exit survey was also completed to compare against the baseline results.

The CMU team found that the couples instructed to have more sex reported a small decrease in happiness, lower sexual desire and decreased enjoyment from sex.

However, the researchers believe that this lowered happiness was not simply caused by having more sex, but by the fact the couples were required to have more sex as part of the study, without them initiating it naturally.

Authors still believe that couples do not have enough sex

George Loewenstein, the study's lead investigator and the Herbert A. Simon University Professor of Economics and Psychology in the Dietrich College of Humanities and Social Sciences, explains:

"Perhaps couples changed the story they told themselves about why they were having sex, from an activity voluntarily engaged in to one that was part of a research study. If we ran the study again, and could afford to do it, we would try to encourage subjects into initiating more sex in ways that put them in a sexy frame of mind, perhaps with babysitting, hotel rooms or Egyptian sheets, rather than directing them to do so."

Interestingly, Prof. Loewenstein believes that the majority of couples have less sex than is good for them and considers increasing sexual frequency to be beneficial for most couples.

"The desire to have sex decreases much more quickly than the enjoyment of sex once it's been initiated," adds Tamar Krishnamurti, a research scientist in CMU's Department of Engineering and Public Policy.

"Instead of focusing on increasing sexual frequency to the levels they experienced at the beginning of a relationship," elaborates Krishnamurti, "couples may want to work on creating an environment that sparks their desire and makes the sex that they do have even more fun."

Continue to Read more ...