Monday, January 22, 2007
The posturing of Viagra
An "AIDS group" (that's the A.P.'s description, not mine) has sued Pfizer alleging that it has promoted Viagra for use in conjunction with crystal meth. The latter supposedly heightens sexual desire while impairing a man's ability actually to have sex, so crank afficionados take it with Viagra in a "cocktail" (again, the A.P.'s word, not mind). However asinine the plaintffs' case undoubtedly is, we can still delight in this absurd response from Pfizer:
Pfizer denied it promotes the recreational use of its blockbuster drug.
Like all sports fans, I have seen a lot of "ED" advertisements in the last few years. I don't recall ever understanding that procreation was the primary purpose of these drugs. Nor, by the way, did I ever get the impression that Viagra was especially useful in conjunction with crystal meth.
The lure and stresses of litigation and the fear that a flack's words can be tortured into probative evidence often lead litigants to make complete jackasses of themselves. First, activists decide that Pfizer should pay damages because Viagra makes it possible for drug addicts to consummate sexually and to that end claims that Pfizer is promoting crank. Then, Pfizer responds by denying that it promotes Viagra for "recreational use" when it quite obviously does within any ordinary meaning of the word. What a bunch of maroons, and what a shame on us that we allow our courts to be used in this way.
3 Comments:
By 
, at
Mon Jan 22, 05:25:00 PM:
"Pfizer denied it promotes the recreational use of its blockbuster drug." A man can father a child at almost any age. It ain't likely, but it can happen. Witness Hugh Heffner's recent announcement.
By 
Assistant Village Idiot, at
Mon Jan 22, 06:18:00 PM:
I am not sure you can make a good "recreational" distinction for above-the-neck and below-the-neck uses. Driving safety, maybe.
By Buce, at
Mon Jan 22, 11:28:00 PM:
Didn't we all grow up with rubbers that said "sold for the prevention of venereal disease only"--?
