Society favors "out-of-the-blue" desire. But why? Most people (especially women, to make matters much worse, in the case of this drug) don't experience sexual desire that way; that's just how we are. Flibanserin tries to "solve" the "problem" of normal human sexuality. That's not to say some women who can't experience desire, but want to, wouldn't benefit from a drug like this. But that's not how this is being marketed. Nor is this pill good science; most people (men and women) with low desire will benefit far more from therapy (and for far less money than the ongoing cost of a pill).
Like many women, the two flibanserin Guinea pigs were taught to believe that if they don't experience a "craving" sensation, there must be something wrong with them. But that's simply not true.
Research over the last 20 years has found that there is another totally legitimate way to experience desire. It is called responsive desire, because it emerges in response to pleasure, whereas spontaneous desire emerges in anticipation of pleasure.
...
The FDA's analysis of the data showed that only about 10% of the research participants taking flibanserin experienced "at least minimal improvement," while the remaining 90% experienced nothing at all.
This is a drug with such potentially serious side effects that the FDA is requiring special training and certification before providers can prescribe it.
And the "disorder" it treats (or, 90% of the time, fails to treat) isn't a disorder at all but a normal, healthy variation in human sexual response.
The pharmaceutical industry has millions — billions? — of dollars riding on all of us, including our doctors, ignoring 21st century science and reverting to a model of sexual desire that made really good sense in 1977. I think women deserve better.