Health

After Lobbying Push, Drugmaker Resubmits Women’s Sex Pill

Published

11 years ago

February 17, 2015

In this Friday, Sept. 27, 2013, file photo, a tablet of flibanserin sits on a brochure for Sprout Pharmaceuticals in the company’s Raleigh, N.C., headquarters. The pill has been twice rejected, but Sprout Pharmaceuticals said Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2015, it is refiling its application for flibanserin, adding new information requested by the Food and Drug Administration about how the pill affects driving ability. (AP Photo/Allen G. Breed, File)

MATTHEW PERRONE, AP Health Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The makers of a twice-rejected pill designed to boost sexual desire in women are hoping a yearlong lobbying push by politicians, women’s groups and consumer advocates will move their much-debated drug onto the market.

The ongoing saga of Sprout Pharmaceutical’s female libido drug illustrates the complicated politics and unresolved science surrounding women’s sexuality.

For decades, drugmakers have tried unsuccessfully to develop a female equivalent to Viagra, the blockbuster drug that treats men’s erectile dysfunction drug by increasing blood flow. But disorders of women’s sexual desire have proven resistant to drugs that act on blood flow, hormones and other simple biological functions.

Supporters of Sprout’s drug say women’s sexual disorders have been overlooked for too long by regulators at the Food and Drug Administration. But critics argue that women’s sexuality is too complex to be addressed by a single pill.

Sprout’s drug flibanserin is the first attempt to increase libido by acting on brain chemicals linked to appetite and mood. But the Food and Drug Administration has already twice rejected the drug because of lackluster effectiveness and side effects including fatigue, dizziness and nausea.

In an effort to break the regulatory logjam, groups sponsored by Sprout and other drugmakers have begun publicizing the lack of a “female Viagra” as a women’s rights issue.

“Women deserve equal treatment when it comes to sex,” states an online petition to the FDA organized by one such group, Even the Score, which garnered almost 25,000 supporters. The group’s corporate backers include Sprout Pharmaceuticals, Palatin Technologies and Trimel Pharmaceuticals — all companies developing drugs to treat female sexual disorders. A spokeswoman for Blue Engine Media, the public relations group for Even the Score, declined to disclose how much of the group’s funding comes from companies. The group’s nonprofit supporters include the Women’s Health Foundation, the Institute for Sexual Medicine and other organizations.

Drugmakers frequently cite a 1999 survey in the Journal of the American Medical Association that found 43 percent of U.S. women had some type of sexual dysfunction.

Sprout said Tuesday it is refiling its application for flibanserin, adding new information requested by the FDA about how the pill affects driving ability. FDA scientists requested that data after their most recent rejection of the drug, in part, due to results showing nearly 10 percent of women in company trials reported sleepiness as a side effect.

The FDA first rejected flibanserin in 2010 after a panel of expert advisers unanimously voted against the drug, saying its benefits did not outweigh its risks. The drug’s initial developer, Boehringer Ingelheim, abandoned work on the drug in 2011 and sold it to Sprout, a startup headed by a husband-and-wife team from Raleigh, North Carolina.

Sprout resubmitted the drug with additional effectiveness and safety data, but the FDA again rejected the drug in October 2013. After Sprout filed a formal dispute over the decision, FDA regulators requested the driving study and other details on the drug’s interactions with other medications.

As Sprout gathered that data, the company also enlisted support from influential allies in Washington and beyond. Last January four members of Congress, including Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida, sent a letter to the FDA, urging a careful reassessment of the drug and lamenting the lack of drug options for low female libido.

“There are 24 approved medical treatments for male sexual dysfunction and not one single treatment yet approved for the most common form of female sexual dysfunction,” states the letter, which was also signed by Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-New York, and two other Democratic congresswomen.

The talking point about the imbalance of drugs for men versus women was picked up by a coalition of seven women’s and consumer health groups who met with the FDA early last year.

“We see this not only as an important unmet women’s health issue, but an inflection point for the agency to ensure that similar standards are applied for drug approvals in conditions uniquely affecting women,” states a follow-up letter to the agency from leaders of the National Organization for Women, the National Consumers League and four other groups.

Then last October the FDA held a two-day meeting at its headquarters to get public input on the problem of female sexual dysfunction and the challenge of developing treatments.

If approved, flibanserin would be labeled for premenopausal women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder, described as a lack of sexual appetite that causes emotional distress. Because so many factors affect female sexual appetite, there are a number of other possible causes doctors must rule out before diagnosing the condition, including relationship problems, hormone disorders, depression and mood issues caused by other drugs like sleeping aids and pain medications.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Groups: AIDS Number 1 Killer of Adolescents in Africa

Don't Miss

Eye-Opener: US Teens Getting Less & Less Sleep, Study Shows

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

COMMENTARY: The Biases We Don’t See — Preventing AI-Driven Inequality in Health Care

For decades, medicine promoted false assumptions about Black bodies. Black patients were told they had lower lung capacity, and medical devices adjusted their results accordingly. That practice was not broadly reversed until 2021. Up until 2022, a common medical formula used to measure how well a person’s kidneys were working automatically gave Black patients a higher score simply because they were Black. On paper, this made their kidneys appear healthier than they truly were. As a result, kidney disease was sometimes detected later in Black patients, delaying critical treatment and referrals.

Published

1 week ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, M.D (D-San Diego). File photo.

By Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, M.D., Special to California Black Media Partners

Technology is sold to us as neutral, objective, and free of human flaws. We are told that computers remove emotion, bias, and error from decision-making. But for many Black families, lived experience tells a different story. When technology is trained on biased systems, it reflects those same biases and silently carries them forward.

We have seen this happen across multiple industries. Facial recognition software has misidentified Black faces at far higher rates than White faces, leading to wrongful police encounters and arrests. Automated hiring systems have filtered out applicants with traditionally Black names because past hiring data reflected discriminatory patterns. Financial algorithms have denied loans or offered worse terms to Black borrowers based on zip codes and historical inequities, rather than individual creditworthiness. These systems did not become biased on their own. They were trained on biased data.

Healthcare is not immune.

These biases were not limited to software or medical devices. Dangerous myths persisted that Black people feel less pain, contributing to undertreatment and delayed care. These beliefs were embedded in modern training and practice, not distant history. Those assumptions shaped the data that now feeds medical technology. When biased clinical practices form the basis of algorithms, the risk is not hypothetical. The bias can be learned, automated, and scaled.

For us in the Black community, this creates understandable fear and mistrust. Many families already carry generational memories of medical discrimination, from higher maternal mortality to lower life expectancy to being dismissed or unheard in clinical settings. Adding AI biases could make our community even more apprehensive about the healthcare system.

As a physician, I know how much trust patients place in the healthcare system during their most vulnerable moments. As a Black woman, I understand how bias can shape experiences in ways that are often invisible to those who do not live them. As a mother of two Black children, I think constantly about the systems that will shape their health and well-being. As a legislator, I believe it is our responsibility to confront emerging risks before they become widespread harm.

That is why I am the author of Senate Bill (SB) 503. This bill aims to regulate the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare by requiring developers and users of AI systems to identify, mitigate, and monitor biased impacts in their outputs to reduce racial and other disparities in clinical decision-making and patient care.

Currently under consideration in the State Assembly, SB 503 was not written to slow innovation. In fact, I encourage it. But it is our duty must ensure that every tool we in the healthcare field helps patients rather than harms them.

The health of our families depends on it.

About the Author

Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D–San Diego) is a physician and public health advocate representing California’s 39th Senate District.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

As California Hits Aging Milestone, State Releases Its Fifth Master Plan for Aging

“California’s Master Plan for Aging started a powerful movement that is shaping the future of aging in our state for generations to come,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement, calling the initiative a “future-forward” model delivering real results for older adults, people with disabilities, and their families.

Published

1 week ago

February 9, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

On Jan. 27, California released its Fifth Master Plan for Aging Annual Report,titled “Focusing on What Matters Most,” outlining the state’s progress and priorities as its population rapidly grows older.

The report, issued by the California Health and Human Services Agency (CalHHS), provides updates on the Master Plan for Aging’s “Five Bold Goals”: housing, health, inclusion and equity, caregiving, and affordability.

The report comes as Californians aged 60 and older now outnumber those under 18 for the first time, a demographic shift expected to accelerate over the next decade.

Launched in 2021, the Master Plan for Aging takes a “whole-of- government” and “whole-of-society” approach, coordinating state agencies, local governments, community organizations, and private partners. The annual report highlights significant milestones, including more than 100 California communities joining AARP’s Age-Friendly Network and $4 million in state funding awarded to local organizations to develop aging and disability action plans in 30 communities statewide.

The report also underscores California’s leadership at the national level, noting that dozens of states have followed its example and that federal legislation inspired by the plan was reintroduced in the U.S. Senate in December 2025.

CalHHS Secretary Kim Johnson emphasized the plan’s focus on equity and resilience amid ongoing challenges.

“The Master Plan for Aging continues to provide a vision, a focus, and a platform for collaboration,” Johnson said. “Equity is at the center of all that we do.”

Looking ahead, the report notes that by 2030, one in four Californians will be age 60 or older, positioning the Master Plan for Aging as a central framework for meeting the state’s long-term social, economic, and health needs.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Community

Candidates Vying for Governor’s Seat Debate at Ruth Williams–Bayview Opera House in San Francisco

The gubernatorial debate participants included Antonio Villaraigosa, former Los Angeles mayor; Matt Mahan, San Jose mayor; Betty Yee, former California state controller; Xavier Becerra, former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, and attorney general of California; Steve Hilton, political commentator and political adviser; Tom Steyer, entrepreneur, and Tony Thurmond, California’s superintendent of public instruction.

Published

1 week ago

February 9, 2026

Oakland Post

The gubernatorial debate was hosted by KTVU’s Greg Lee, KTTV’s Marla Tellez and KTVU’s Andre Senior. The candidates are (l.-r.): Xavier Becerra, Steve Hilton, Matt Mahan, Tom Steyer, Tony Thurmond, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Betty Yee.

By Carla Thomas

On Tuesday, Feb. 3, seven candidates took the stage at the historic Ruth Williams–Bayview Opera House in San Francisco for the gubernatorial debate, hosted by the Black Action Alliance (BAA) in partnership with KTVU and sister station KTTV Fox 11 in Los Angeles.

For many voters, it marked a first opportunity to hear directly from several candidates seeking to lead the nation’s most populous state.

Crucial topics and issues addressed throughout the debate included housing, crime, immigration, climate change, health care and homelessness.

The debate was moderated by KTVU political reporter Greg Lee alongside KTVU’s Andre Senior and KTTV Fox 11’s Marla Tellez.

Candidates also addressed inflation and the rising costs across the state, impacting everything from groceries to childcare and health care.

Thurmond vowed to generate 2.3 million units of housing by placing 12 units on each parcel of available land in the 58 counties of California. Steyer agreed that billionaires should pay their fair share of taxes.

Hilton wanted to cut taxes, help working-class families, and end the Democrats “climate crusade and insane regulations.”

Yee offered a more transparent governmental approach with accountability, given the state’s debt.

Gonzalez said, “This debate was a great way to see who has great ideas and who has substance.”

“It’s important to have the debate within a community that requires the most,” said business leader Linda Fadekye.

Attendees included State Controller Malia Cohen, representatives of the National Coalition of 100 Black Women, the National Coalition of 100 Black Men, the San Francisco African American Chamber of Commerce, and Black Women Organized for Political Action, among others.

Event host, the Black Action Alliance (BAA) was established to amplify the voices of the Bay Area’s Black community, whose perspectives have too often been overlooked in politics and public policy.

Loren Taylor, CEO of BAA, said it was important to bring the event to the Bayview in San Francisco and shared his organization’s mission.

“The Black Action Alliance (BAA) stands for practical, community-driven solutions that strengthen public safety, address homelessness, support small businesses, expand affordable housing, and ensure access to quality education—issues at the heart of the Black experience in the Bay Area,” said Taylor.

California’s primary election will take place on June 2 and the general election will take place on Nov. 3.