The making of a disease: female sexual dysfunction

doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7390.658

BMJ 2003;326:658 ( 22 March )

Letters

The making of a disease: female sexual dysfunction

Without industry funding little new research will be possible

Diversity of experiences should be acknowledged

Conspiracy of silence hinders understanding

Inaccuracies are not helpful

Summary of responses

Author's reply

Without industry funding little new research will be possible

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR $---$ Moynihan wrote about female sexual dysfunction as a disease in the making.¹ As co-chairs for an (unpaid) internationalcommittee, commissioned and supported by the American Foundationof Urological Disease, to improve definitions of women's sexualdysfunction, we regret the sensational biased view of industryfunded research of biological components of women's sexual function.The common error of equating self reported sexual problems withmedically diagnosable disorder is well recognised.

Table Removed (Available Only in the Full Text)

However, to focus only on this and neglect the need for research into aetiology, pathogenesis, and treatment of women's sexualdysfunction from disease, medical, and surgical interventions,is unfortunate. To date, neither the major neurotransmitter involvedin vaginal congestion nor the autonomic innervation of the vulvalstructures has been established. Industry funding facilitatesresearch of interrupted sexual responses from chemotherapy, pelvicsurgery, neurological disease, premature menopause, and drug treatment,as well as healthy sexualphysiology.

We question the concept . . . [Full text of this article]