I'm somewhat confused by your response. The purpose of the drug is for application to a pretty large but specific group: women. You seem to be implying the drug would work just as well for men.

I bet there are variations in response to drugs from individual to individual too, based on genetic differences we're only beginning to understand.

Even with something highly correlated, like the recessive gene for sickle cell appearing mostly in people of African origin, I won't support saying now we can just look at the groups and not the individual.

You must have missed the entire purpose of the drug in the first place. They were trying to create a Viagra/Cialis-type product which worked on women, because Viagra/Cialis only work on men. Obviously the wiring does matter or products like Viagra/Cialis would work on both men and women alike.

There is a difference between exploring reality and trying to ignore reality - or even re-writing it. Rand noted as much.

Please read the instructions. For external use only.

"The pill offers meaningful help for only about 10 percent more patients than a placebo, and it comes with a risk of ..low blood pressure and fainting. To minimize these potential problems, women are supposed to refrain from alcohol while taking the daily pill."

"Jewelry probably has a better success rate."
It depends. Is this drug soluble in a typical drink containing 15% alcohol?

We don't need to work out how groups are wired and their natural predispositions. We need to let all individuals explore life and reality for themselves.

And highly effective. ;)

Chocolate is still legal,

Exactly. For the right amount of money it's perfectly safe.

When I scanned through the story, I found it interesting that the drug had already been rejected by the FDA twice. Looks to me like someone greased some palms...

Typical drug company crap. Only 10% more than the placebo group saw an improvement and it may cause low blood pressure. Why did this even get approved? Jewelry probably has a better success rate.