[identity profile] datagoddess.livejournal.com 2005-08-26 03:10 pm (UTC)(link)
Now, if they could make a drug to speed up the reaction, I have an ex girlfriend that would be perfect for...

[identity profile] wispfox.livejournal.com 2005-08-26 03:12 pm (UTC)(link)
Heh. They're probably working on that one... :)

[identity profile] regyt.livejournal.com 2005-08-26 03:15 pm (UTC)(link)
That's what infuriates me so much about this news. What kind of mind could possibly think to develop a drug to suppress women's orgasms instead of to help them along? I'm reacting remarkably emotionally to this.

[identity profile] datagoddess.livejournal.com 2005-08-26 03:22 pm (UTC)(link)
I wonder if they discovered it as a side effect of another drug they were working on, and decided to file the patent for that because the other purpose didn't work out.

I've contracted at a fairly large drug company and they don't put money into something they *know* they have no real market for. I'm guessing someone was reaching to justify R&D for a drug that didn't do what they originally wanted it to do, but picked that as the only thing it did actually do.

Or I'm just a hopeless optimist. Either is possible.

[identity profile] wispfox.livejournal.com 2005-08-26 03:24 pm (UTC)(link)
That is an excellent point. And I can easily see that as being why such a patent would happen.

Of course... if the drug _did_ already exist, I can also see people attempting to convince patients that they need the drug. (or drug companies trying to convince doctors to look for things that might need that... Perhaps, for example, to handle people who are addicted to sex, or something... *sigh*)

[identity profile] vvvexation.livejournal.com 2005-08-26 07:36 pm (UTC)(link)
Kinda like the companies trying to convince women they lubricate too much during sex.

[identity profile] wispfox.livejournal.com 2005-08-26 07:40 pm (UTC)(link)
... yeah. I forget that gets claimed as a _BAD_ thing.