Marketing decisions, rather than scientific
innovations, have guided the development and positioning of contraceptive
products in recent years. I review the stalled progress in contraceptive
development in the decades following the advent of the Pill in 1960 and then
examine the fine-tuning of the market for oral contraceptives in the 1990s and
2000s. Although birth control has been pitched in the United States as an
individual solution, rather than a public health strategy, the purpose of oral
contraceptives was understood by manufacturers, physicians, and consumers to be
the prevention of pregnancy, a basic health care need for women. Best Place to Buy
Percocet Online without Prescription. Since
1990, the content of that message has changed, reflecting a shift in the drug
industry's view of the contraception business. Two factors contributed to bring
about this change: first, the industry's move away from research and
development in birth control and second, the growth of the class of medications
known as lifestyle drugs. Visit here
https://pills-pharmacyonline.com
IN
MARCH 2011, THE SAN Francisco Chronicle ran
a front-page story on contraceptives. It began, “These days, choosing a form of
birth control can seem as daunting as shopping for a new laptop computer – the
technology is constantly changing and there are just so many options.”1 Even though scores of different
brand-name and generic products are available on the American market, a closer
inspection of the contraceptive landscape reveals a menu of birth control
options that relies on science that is more than 50 years old. Since the Pill
was first approved in 1960, birth control continues to work in only one of two
ways: by preventing fertilization or by preventing ovulation. The barrier
methods—condoms, diaphragms, cervical caps, and chemical spermicides—have
existed for the better part of a century (and in the case of condoms, for
centuries). Buy
Klonopin 2mg, Order
Klonopin 2mg online
The modern intrauterine devices (IUDs) became
available in the early 1960s, but they merely improved on a method first
introduced in the 1920s. Hormonal contraception—in which synthetic hormones,
either progesterone alone or in combination with estrogen, prevent
ovulation—was the truly innovative contribution made by the Pill. The newer
methods that have come onto the market since 1990—the implant, the shot, the
skin patch, and the vaginal ring—simply provide different delivery systems for
the hormones to enter the bloodstream.2 Even the technologies behind these
delivery systems (e.g., silastic capsules for the implant, transdermal
materials for the patch) were developed in the 1960s and 1970s. In the world of
contraception, scientific and technological innovation has been moribund for
decades. Buy
Ativan, Ativan for sale
Why might women need new methods of
contraception? A few statistics from 1990 confirm the inadequacy of available
methods. An Institute of Medicine study3 of contraception that year reported that
almost 3 million unintended pregnancies occurred annually in the United States
as the result of contraceptive failure. Half of the 1.5 million abortions in
the United States every year were performed to deal with pregnancies resulting from
contraceptive failure. One million adolescent girls get pregnant each year. Of
women younger than 50 years, 20% had been sterilized, with another 15% married
to men who had vasectomies; these people chose to end their fertility rather
than deal with contraceptive alternatives, but up to 10% of the women regretted
their decision after remarriage or the death of a child.4 Although issues of affordability;
cultural constraints; and access to health education, information sources, and
contraceptives all influence the effective use of birth control, the physical
aspects of existing contraceptive technologies also play a role in women's
decisions about whether to use them. Buy Diazepam, Diazepam for sale, Where to buy diazepam
Carl Djerassi, the chemist who first synthesized
an orally active progesterone (which made oral hormonal contraception
possible), predicted this static state of affairs 40 years ago in a prescient
article in Science titled
“Birth Control after 1984.”5 In 1989, he revisited the topic of
contraceptive research and development in “The Bitter Pill” published in Science.6 He attributed the dearth of innovation to
the withdrawal of American pharmaceutical companies from the field. In 1970, 13
major drug firms were actively pursuing birth control research and development
(of which nine were American); by 1987, there were only four (with just one
located in the United States). Little has changed since then, despite the
continued success of the pharmaceutical industry and the expansion of small
biotechnology enterprises. Buy
Dormicum, Order
Dormicum online