The Law of Unintended Consequences....?
So, are they actually using the pill or just some of the compounds? I read the article but got lost.
If the pill, will there be a sudden increase in the birth rate?
The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation has been buying Viagra, in a good cause: it seems to help beat one of the common malaria parasites, Plasmodium falciparum. The mechanism is even analogous to Viagra's better-known effect: it makes infected red blood cells stiffer, which marks them down to be cleaned out by the spleen. As …
Maybe if you got lost reading the article you should have read it again before posting a comment?
It clearly states they are buying Viagra, not some subset of compounds to make their own elixir.
I don't think they would want to go to the time and trouble (cost) of doing their own drug development and testing. That's a very expensive and long term exercise and not what the foundation is about.
Drug companies are about drug R&D, the Gates foundation is not a drug company.
Viagra may well enable some people to *ahem^ 'perform' in a manner more pleasing to the person they are coupled to but I don't believe it increases fertility. So no, no increase in birth rate.
Thanks for the kick... I got lost in the paper itself after reading the article and that wiped out my remembering first sentence I gotta' get some more coffee.
I realize there's no increase in fertility... I was referencing an increase in the amount of pleasurable activity. Much like 9 months after a severe storm and/or power outage, there's usually a pip upwards in the birth rate.
Having criticised you I've given now you an upvote!
I agree some fleeting phase can give rise to a pip upwards, but taking Viagra is not a coordinated event (I hope) so I doubt there would be a blip as with an event affecting many people such as a major power cut.
The upvote is for accepting the kicking, in hindsight perhaps I should have worn trainers instead of Dr. Martens!
Have a good day Mark 85.
Drug companies are about drug R&D, the Gates foundation is not a drug company.
No, but they are obviously willing to do the research if it helps meet their stated goals. This sort of study is fairly common as it is much easier to get approval to test an existing drug to do something it was not original intended to do that to develop and whole new drug for a specific purpose. The up-front costs of R&D are already paid and it has been approved for use. In fact, the drug was originally intended for treatment of hypertension. All they have to do is find out how effective it is against the target disease. It also may have the pleasant result for the drug company of expanding their market. This is a smart way of getting the job done.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
Along with the existing one of moderating or preventing High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema, where you get fluid buildup in the lungs when mountaineering over 2500m.
A friend of mine was attempting a first ascent on a peak in the Himalaya a decade or so ago, and shocked hell out of the local pharmacist when he presented a prescription for six hundred tablets - it was the supply for his whole party for two months.
I'm not sure what her first thought was, but Sex Fiend had to be pretty high up there.