Introduction: drug trajectories.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Jean-Paul Gaudillière.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
This paper follows the trajectory of sex steroids in 1930s Germany as a way to investigate the system of research which characterized the development of these drugs. Analyzing the changing relationship between the pharmaceutical company Schering and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute für Biochemie headed by Nobel Prize winner Adolf Butenandt, the paper highlights the circulation of materials, information and money as much as the role of patents in shaping the study of sex steroids. Semi-synthetic analogs and metabolic pathways thus emerged as shared bio-industrial assets. This collaborative work participated in a more general 'internalization' of biology, which took place in pharmaceutical firms during the 1920s and 1930s as a strategy to standardize and develop biologicals. The construction of the hormone market was also based on Schering's collaboration with a selected group of clinicians who worked out the wide-range of indications associated with these 'natural' drugs. The paper finally shows how the wartime scientific and industrial mobilization in Nazi Germany marginalized the study of sex steroids and led to the dismantling of the KWIB-Schering network.
Routine acceptance of use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) was shattered in 2002 when results of the largest HRT randomised clinical trial, the women's health initiative, indicated that long term use of oestrogen plus progestin HRT not only was associated with increased risk of cancer but, contrary to expectations, did not decrease, and may have increased, risk of cardiovascular disease. In June 2004 a group of historians, epidemiologists, biologists, clinicians, and women's health advocates met to discuss the scientific and social context of and response to these findings. It was found that understanding the evolving and contending knowledge on hormones and health requires: (1) considering its societal context, including the impact of the pharmaceutical industry, the biomedical emphasis on individualised risk and preventive medicine, and the gendering of hormones; and (2) asking why, for four decades, since the mid-1960s, were millions of women prescribed powerful pharmacological agents already demonstrated, three decades earlier, to be carcinogenic? Answering this question requires engaging with core issues of accountability, complexity, fear of mortality, and the conduct of socially responsible science.