Health For Sex

Last week I went a bit overboard complaining about the limits of quantitative social science research. Reading Tania Rabesandratana’s article about Flibanserin in the Inkling got me going again. It was this quote from Petra Boynton in response to a Flibanserin researcher marking a difference between “internal” and “environmental” factors in sexual desire (as if such distinctions are ever fully possible):

Dr. Petra would like to see Flibanserin pitted against precisely such “environmental factors.” “Why not test the drug not only vs. placebo, but also vs. using a sex toy or lubricant, communicating better with your partner, having a glass of wine, or going to sex education sessions?” she suggests.

Absolutely! Why not test drugs in ways that reflect the lived experience of sexuality rather than the most artificial and sterile of sexual reproductions? I should think lube and sex toys companies would be all over this. Of course there’s no reason for a for profit drug company to do research that might not support the sales of its potential products. Also I can imagine researchers having all sorts of methodological problems with controls and comparison groups if you throw pharmaceuticals, vibrators, and sex workshops in the mix. It would make it harder to do a study like that and come out with meaningful data, but what does that say about the overall approach of this kind of research?

Read more – Inkling Magazine: Women’s Fliberation

Related -Female Viagra

A Sex Study I’d Like to See originally appeared on About.com Sexuality on Friday, January 29th, 2010 at 00:01:00.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Go here to read the rest:
A Sex Study I’d Like to See