Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com

HEADLINE HEADLINE HEADLINE

SPONSORED BY
The Human Condition Blog - Newsweek.com
  • There Is No Such Thing As Female Viagra: Flibanserin Can't Change Why Some Women Don't Want Sex

    Newsweek | Nov 18, 2009 10:42 AM
    by Barbara Kantrowitz

    Back in the pre-Viagra age, men were actually impotent. Now, guys with a mechanical problem suffer from erectile dysfunction (E.D. in the ubiquitous TV ads), clearly one of Big Pharma’s most successful rebranding efforts. But women have been denied a similar makeover for their sexual problems because no one has yet figured out why some want it all the time and others hardly ever. If you’re too tired, you’re just plain frigid.

    That could change with the announcement this week that a pill that appears to increase sexual desire in women with low libidos. This potential blockbuster, developed by the German drug manufacturer Boehringer Ingelheim, is called flibanserin and it was almost a nonstarter when it was first tested as an antidepressant. Flibanserin didn’t lift mood, but researchers noticed that it had one intriguing quality: it appeared to heighten sexual interest in laboratory animals and humans.

    Could it be Big Pharma’s Holy Grail: a female Viagra? No doubt inspired by the tantalizing possibility of gazillions in worldwide sales, Boehringer paid for clinical trials of flibanserin in nearly 2,000 premenopausal European, American, and Canadian women suffering from hypoactive sexual desire disorder, a controversial diagnosis that reportedly affects as many as one in four women.

    The results, presented earlier this week at the Congress of the European Society for Sexual Medicine in Lyon, France, showed that the women in the trial who took a daily dose of 100 milligrams of flibanserin for about six months increased the number of “sexually satisfying events” (not necessarily orgasm) to an average of 4.5 from 2.8 in the North American arm of the trial, compared to 3.7 in the placebo group.The women on flibanserin also said they were more interested in sex than those taking a placebo.

    Flibanserin won’t be on sale any time soon. Boehringer still needs to get approval from the FDA and other regulatory bodies around the world, a process which could take years.

    Still, the announcement has already ignited the smoldering debate about the causes and even the definition of sexual dysfunction in women. Sex researchers (mostly men) used to believe that healthy women were just like them, always on the prowl for the right moment. Women who didn’t experience a constant undercurrent of sexual desire were considered abnormal.

    But in recent years, female researchers (most notably University of British Columbia psychiatrist Rosemary Basson) have come to a very different conclusion. Basson and her colleagues have found that while men’s sexual progression is essentially linear─from desire to arousal to orgasm─women’s sexuality is more accurately circular, with one positive factor (such as emotional satisfaction or intimacy) reinforcing others and eventually leading to desire and arousal.

    A woman is most like a man early in a relationship, when she is full of sexual excitement over a new lover. But women in long-term relationships tend to need more stimuli, and that means a guy who satisfies them emotionally (doing the dishes always helps) as well as physically. Women may also steer away from sex because of a large number of nonsexual disorders, including depression, alcoholism, hormonal problems, and even vaginal pain with penetration.

    According to Boehringer, the women in the flibanserin study were only suffering from hypoactive sexual desire disorder, not any other condition that could have hampered their sex drive. But that diagnosis is highly controversial. In order to figure out what it means, you have to define a normal sex drive. No one really knows whether normal means wanting sex once a day, once a month or once a year. Sex researchers currently say that a woman’s sex drive is dysfunctional only if she’s unhappy about it, if it causes her personal distress. That’s why the estimate of how many women suffer from sexual dysfunction ranges from 9 percent to as high as 26 percent.

    Such nuance could vanish if Boehringer eventually wins approval for flibanserin. It’s a good bet that right now there are marketers already testing out brand names and a catchy new label for the old frigid. Any ideas?

    Barbara Kantrowitz writes the "Her Body" column for Newsweek.com

  • Brooke Magnanti's Surprisingly Logical Call Girl Confession: That's DR. Belle Du Jour To You

    Raina Kelley | Nov 17, 2009 01:25 PM

    Unless you’ve been in solitary confinement, you’re aware of the fact that Belle de Jour, blogger, former prostitute, and head of the Diary of a London Call Girl publishing empire has revealed herself to be Dr. Brooke Magnanti, research scientist at the Bristol Initiative for Research of Child Health.

    When she’s not blogging about her past sexploits, she using her Ph.D. in informatics, epidemiology, and forensic science to research the effects of pesticides on children.  How’s that for an unexpected spin on the whore-with-the-heart-of-gold theme?  I’m kinda jealous of her, I have to admit.  Magnanti is like a year of feminist studies rolled into one.  I would have loved to be the first credible candidate for one of feminism’s holy grails:  the empowered sex worker—able to expose herself to patriarchal fantasies of male domination without becoming damaged goods. 

    We may have to add her to our pantheon of saints right up there with Susan Faludi and Katha Pollitt. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a more level-headed and reasonable explanation for becoming a call-girl than this one by Magnanti:


    “I couldn’t find a professional job in my chosen field because I didn’t have my Ph.D. yet. I didn’t have a lot of spare time on my hands because I was still making corrections and preparing for the viva; and I got through my savings a lot faster than I thought I would. … What can I do that I can start doing straightaway, that doesn’t require a great deal of training or investment to get started, that’s cash in hand and that leaves me spare time to do my work in?”


    Is this woman a scientist or what?  Now before you go all ballistic and chastise either myself or Dr. Magnanti for our lack of moral fiber, let me add two things:  working as an escort is not illegal in the United Kingdom.  Yup, prostitution is above board in England—it’s the activities that make sex work a nasty dangerous enterprise that are illegal—no streetwalking, no pimps, no brothels.  Secondly, the idea that prostitution is the only commodified form of erotic activity is crazy.  Consider the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition for a moment—$6.99 and all you get is the illusion of female sexuality.  Magnanti may well be the rare woman who can, as Gloria Steinem put it to Vermont Woman, “experience sexuality as power.…It’s not sexuality that’s the problem, it’s whose sexuality and why?”  That’s also why I can love Belle de Jour and still condemn human trafficking, the prostitution of children, and pimping without appearing hypocritical or naive.

    And lest you think I dodged the whole morality question, let me answer in more detail by punting to a smarter mind.  In Feminist Issues in Prostitution, Sarah Bromberg asserts that our stern disapproval of call girls stems “from an underlying assumption in conventional morality that involvement in prostitution will “necessarily” have degenerative effects on a person leading her to other criminal activities.…Prostitution is not a profound condition of degeneracy and in many instances it may be a self-regarding expression of a person surviving in the best way given their skills and opportunities.”  Take that, you Puritans!

    So, I’m a big fan of Dr. Magnanti now; I might even buy her new book, Belle de Jour’s Guide to Men. I have a feeling her point of view might be more interesting than the play-hard-to-get, treat-men-like-untrainable-dogs claptrap we women usually get. [As it turns out, the start of chapter one hits the "men are like untrainable dogs" metaphor pretty hard. I guess some stereotypes are hard to break, even if you're a pioneering scientist/call girl.]


  • Advertisement
  • New Report Claims That Many Probiotics Provide Fewer Live Cells Than Listed on Labels

    Johannah Cornblatt | Nov 16, 2009 03:27 PM

    Americans are spending more and more dollars each year on probiotic supplements, or so-called “friendly” bacteria. Studies have shown that probiotics—which you might purchase in the form of yogurt, capsules, miso, beverages, or powders—can treat a host of conditions, including irritable bowel syndrome, diarrhea caused by viral infection or antibiotics, vaginal yeast infections, hypertension, the common cold, and even acne. Over the past decade, consumer sales of probiotics in the U.S. have nearly quadrupled (growing from $115 million in 1998 to $425 million in 2008), according to Nutrition Business Journal.

    But, according to a report released today, many of the most popular probiotic supplements don’t contain the amount of live bacteria listed on their labels. ConsumerLab, a private company that tests health and nutritional products at independent labs across the country, found that at the time a consumer buys a probiotic, it may contain as little as 10 to 58 percent of the amount of viable organisms listed on the label. “It’s shocking how many products really don’t have what they claim on their labels,” says Tod Cooperman, the president of ConsumerLab. “The buyer has to be careful.”

    ConsumerLab purchased the probiotics as a consumer would, cultured the products to determine the number of viable cells in them, and compared the results to the amounts listed on the product labels. The company sent any product that did not contain the amount of live cells listed on the label to a second lab for additional testing. “We’re absolutely certain about what we found,” Cooperman says. Despite the misleading numbers, most products contained at least one billion organisms, which is probably enough to provide some—although not necessarily optimal—benefit, according to Cooperman. 

    Find out more about the findings after the jump. 

    More
  • Helping a Fort Hood Victim: Friends Start Fund to Sponsor Wounded Soldier's Family Visit

    Newsweek | Nov 12, 2009 06:45 PM
    Alan Carrol at training in Fort Hood (courtesy of Alan Carrol). by Jeneen Interlandi In the wake of the Fort Hood shootings, many soldiers—including Alan Carrol, who I profiled earlier this week —are still struggling to reunite with loved ones. According... More
  • One Last Thought on Zahara's Hair: Patrice Grell Yursik Weighs In

    Newsweek | Nov 2, 2009 04:15 PM
    The author's nieces and their natural hair (courtesy of Lindsay Grell)

    by Patrice Grell Yursik 

    Can I be honest? If the opportunity presented itself to meet Allison Samuels in person, I might respectfully decline. At the very least I'd be a little nervous. Not because I'd be intimidated by such an esteemed journalist (whose work I have admired in the past) but because apparently she'd look at me and deem my hair to be "a hot mess." And according to her most recent rebuttal, other people are apparently looking at me and thinking the same thing "...because like or not, how we look has a huge impact on how people see us and ultimately judge us. Is it fair? No. But is it reality? Yes, it very much is."

    Wow. That's enough to give anyone self-esteem issues.

    Just about every day of the week, my hair looks quite similar to Zahara Jolie-Pitt's. Yes, it's true, I live in a wash-and-go world. It exists. And it's wonderful here.
    More
  • My Pit-Bull Conversion: Joan Raymond on Her Decision to (Probably) Adopt a Pit Bull

    Newsweek | Nov 2, 2009 02:02 PM
  • The Human Condition, 'On Point With Tom Ashbrook'

    Kate Dailey | Oct 20, 2009 10:15 AM
    At 11 a.m. ET, I'll be discussing The Fat Wars on NPR's On Point With Tom Ashbrook , along with some other guests, including Fatshonista 's Lesley Kinzel. Required reading: the Dan Engber piece in last weekend's New York Times Magazine about battling... More
  • Tonight: Kate Dailey on 'The Agenda With Steve Paikin'

    Kate Dailey | Oct 8, 2009 05:39 PM
  • Hoarding as Art: What You Didn't See on Oprah

    Kate Dailey | Oct 8, 2009 03:46 PM
    Today, Oprah Winfrey spent her entire show speaking with participants from the A&E's reality program Hoarders . Hoarders profiles families who's homes have been overcome by clutter, and brings in professional organizers to try and help clear a literal... More
  • Sharon Begley Predicts the Nobel Prize Laureates: Blackburn, Greider, and Szostak Win for Telomeres Research

    Kate Dailey | Oct 5, 2009 06:52 AM


    This morning at 5:30 ET, the Nobel Prize winners in medicine were announced in Stockholm (where it was a much more reasonable 11:30 a.m.). In an article last week for Newsweek.com, Sharon Begley wrote about experts who are handicapping the race by selecting  "citation laureates." David Pendlebury of Thomson Reuters measured how often scientists' work was cited by others and, based on that, created a list of Nobel frontrunners. Who were the big winners in the Reuters race? Begley reported its findings and put the company's top seeds in context:

    Jack Szostak of Harvard is a pioneer in synthetic biology—basically, creating life in a test tube. For my money, he'll have to wait until he actually succeeds before he gets called to Stockholm, but if he's honored this year it will be a recognition of how far toward that godlike goal he has already come.

    Elizabeth Blackburn of UC San Francisco would be a safer choice: she has made crucial discoveries about telomeres, the caps at the ends of chromosomes that are involved in aging as well as cancer. It would be hard to honor Blackburn without also including Carol Greider of Johns Hopkins, who has also made seminal discoveries about telomeres. Greider is still in her 40s; to gauge her accomplishments, consider that the average age of a first-time NIH grantee is about 43.

    And who were the big winners? Blackburn, Greider, and Szostak, who each took home one third of the Nobel Prize's $10 million winnings. The Nobel committee cited all of their work for its connection to telomeres, the chromosome caps Begley mentioned above. It's the telomere that helps the chromosome reproduce and keeps it from degrading, said the committee, and Blackburn, Greider, and Szostak were integral in figuring that out:

    Elizabeth Blackburn and Jack Szostak discovered that a unique DNA sequence in the telomeres protects the chromosomes from degradation. Carol Greider and Elizabeth Blackburn identified telomerase, the enzyme that makes telomere DNA. These discoveries explained how the ends of the chromosomes are protected by the telomeres and that they are built by telomerase.

    The Nobel committee suggests that further research on telomeres may lead to breakthroughs in anti-aging, cancer treatment, and inherited diseases.

    This is just the beginning of Nobel week—tomorrow the prize for physics will be announced, followed by the chemistry award on Wednesday, literature on Thursday, peace on Friday, and economics on Saturday. In her article, Begley reported on more findings by Thomson Reuters's Pendlebury, who so far is three for three, and she speculated on winners in other categories. In the final prize, she specifically likes William Nordhaus and Martin Weitzman for their work on the economics of environmental protection. Check in with nobelprize.org this weekend to find out if the Nobel committee feels the same.


  • Why Readers Have Sex: I Never Look For It

    Kate Dailey | Oct 4, 2009 06:43 PM
    After reading Jessica Bennett's article on the why women have sex , it's clear that for everyone, men and women, our motivations go way beyond the need for love or the biological drive to reproduce. So we asked our readers to share some of their stories... More
  • Why Readers Have Sex: It's Better Than A Workout

    Kate Dailey | Oct 3, 2009 06:05 PM
    After reading Jessica Bennett's article on the why women have sex , it's clear that for everyone, men and women, our motivations go way beyond the need for love or the biological drive to reproduce. So we asked our readers to share some of their stories... More
  • Readers Share Why They Have Sex: 'I Can Be A Badass'

    Newsweek | Oct 2, 2009 05:30 PM

    After reading Jessica Bennett's article on the why women have sex, it's clear that for everyone, men and women, our motivations go way beyond the need for love or the biological drive to reproduce. So we asked our readers to share some of their stories about sexual motivation.

    Over the weekend, we'll publish some of our favorites. Submit your stories to newsweek@tumblr.com or via our Tumblr page.

    Reader Submission 1:  Low Standards For Sex, Higher for Relationships

    Like many teenagers I was a “loser” in high school. I had a grand total of one sexual partner at the time, in my freshman year, and he didn’t even go to my school. I didn’t love him, he was more like a friend, and I had sex with him because the opportunity was there. I suppose I was sick of feeling like a geek with no sex life to speak of. We broke it off shortly after, of course.

    After turning 18, I decided to try online dating. I wanted to make certain my usual circle of buddies were not messed with. I never considered having a relationship with any of my friends because I knew it would ruin what we already had. This is why I always preferred people to start out as perfect strangers. I don’t like to put any strong emotional attachments on my sexual partners or make any official commitments. That isn’t to say that I wouldn’t want a real relationship, but I have never sensed a strong enough connection with anyone to feel ready for such a step.

    Find out why this reader would rather have a hot fling than a dumb boyfriend after the jump. 

    More
  • The Sock on the Door and Other Life Lessons: Why Tufts' No-Dorm-Sex Policy Cheats Students

    Newsweek | Oct 2, 2009 12:15 PM

    By Leigh Bond

    Kat B., I have a confession: remember that time freshman year when you went home early and my boyfriend was in town so we stayed out late? We came home thankful you happened to fall asleep with music on, and that beds on cinder blocks don’t squeak. Because even though you were only a few feet away, and you could have woken up at any time … no big surprise, but we were doing it.

    You were probably already clued in, as evidenced by the sheepish smiles we shot one another over our Saturday-morning dining-hall waffles. But guess what? We all got through it. Then two weeks later, when you invited an entire band to crash in our room during the fall music festival, I went with it, gladly offering up extra pillows to scrawny boys in tighty whities. Because let’s face it: (1) they were pretty cute, and (2) I owed you big. You let me being a tacky lush slide and I let you live out your indie-band groupie dreams, no strings attached.

    In other words, we worked it out on our own like budding grown-ups because isn’t that the point of having a college roommate?
       
    Apparently though, if I were a student this year at Tufts University, my late-night bad manners would be not only mine and Kat’s weird, blush-inducing problem, but the resident adviser's, the dorm's, and the school's: a new regulation prohibits students in dorms from having sex while their roommate is in the room.

    On the surface, it's a good rule: it goes without question that having sex while your roommate desperately cranks up the iPod in the bunk above you is gross and inconsiderate. At the same time, learning to handle the situation is a vital part of growing up into a personally accountable adult. Having a surrogate parental crutch (à la the poor RA) around to finagle the situation for you equals passive immaturity at its most detrimental.

    According to CNN.com, the handbook's rules on overnight guests directs students to "not engage in sexual activity while your roommate is present in the room. And sexual activity within your assigned room should not ever deprive your roommate(s) of privacy, study, or sleep time." (In other words, no "sexiling.")

    That’s not unreasonable, but is it really necessary? Why not just buck up and grow up? Learn roommate ground rules early. Don’t be routinely inappropriate, and don't expect your roommate to be a paragon of moral virtue. If it becomes a recurrent, life-altering roommate problem, then address it—by calling your roommate out on her behavior and setting up a twin-bed tango schedule, not calling the campus police. Getting the university involved seems so opposite of what college is supposed to teach you: how to handle reality without a protective shield. If you can’t learn to live with quiet, awkward sex from your roommate in college, how do you deal with loud, floor-banging sex from your roommates in apartments postgrad? (It happens.)

    Knowing how to stand up for yourself is an integral part of transitioning to adulthood, where even more difficult and uncomfortable situations inevitably arise. Learning when to let things slide versus when to confront a legitimate problem—while recognizing that you still have to interact every day with the source of said problem—is a skill vital to social and professional experience. Your RA can’t get you a raise when you feel you deserve one, your mom won’t be there to tell future roommates to pay for the shoes their dog ate, and your college handbook won’t have tips on how to dump your sweet-but-clingy boyfriend.

    Tuft’s giggle-inducing rule isn’t even really about sex. It’s about life—stepping up to it, preparing for it, experiencing it, and creating a personal threshold of the acceptable and the intolerable. In other words, finding your own voice and using it with legitimacy, and knowing when to tell your roommate "Dude, inappropriate!" or "Girl, you owe me," or simply thinking "Hey, that’s gonna make for a funny story over breakfast tomorrow."

    College is chock-full of awkward, problematic moments and weighty issues. As far as roommate relations go, if they're not having sex while you're in the room, they're probably downloading music on your computer without asking, eating your food, helping themselves to your closet, or using your toothpaste. People overstepping their bounds, taking what's yours, and thinking of their pleasure instead of your rights happens—in college, at work, in marriage, and throughout life.

    The good news: no matter how tricky the problems of the real world, if you make it through dorm living, you’ll probably never have to share a narrow room with a near stranger ever again. The bad news: if you don’t learn to deal with/laugh at/change the problems that this living situation creates, if you never learn how to assert yourself, you’ll find yourself getting screwed in an entirely different way after graduation.

    Kat B., I owe ya.

     

    BOND is a student at NYU, a NEWSWEEK intern, and an occasional tacky lush. 


  • Why Do You Have Sex? Submit Your Responses Below.

    Kate Dailey | Sep 30, 2009 10:21 AM

    Now that you've had time to read Jessica Bennett's fascinating piece on women's sexual motivations, we want to hear your stories. Do you think that sex is something that should be done only when you're in love—except for that one time you wanted to get back at your ex? Are you happy to use sex just as a tool for physical release, and not attach any emotion? Have you ever used sex to get a job, get over an ex, or get validation that you rocked that bridesmaid dress? Did it do the trick, or leave you feeling you'd let yourself down? Men, have you ever had sex for reasons more complicated than you'd like to admit? Do you feel the idea that you have sex only for pleasure has led to your physical and emotional needs being ignored?

    Let's be honest: the idea that men and women are on totally different planets when it comes to love and sex seems less and less likely the more we learn (and the more we talk) about our sexual motivations. And with that new understanding comes less shame, more clarity, and a better experience—in and out of the bedroom—for all of us. So let's keep talking. Send your stories of why you've had sex—for pure or less-than-pure reasons—to newsweek@tumblr.com.

    Or submit them on our Tumblr page. We'll print some of the best stories (anonymously, of course) on Friday.

    Update 11:45 a.m.: If you tried to submit your story and found a broken link, it's fixed. Submit your stories here.