IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v49y1999i9p1139-1155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

"Not just a statistic": the history of USA and UK policy over thrombotic disease and the oral contraceptive pill, 1960s-1970s

Author

Listed:
  • Marks, Lara

Abstract

Today it is estimated that over 100 million women worldwide have taken the oral contraceptive pill since 1956, when the first clinical trials were undertaken. Since its introduction on to the American market in 1960 and the British one in 1961, the pill has become one of the most popular contraceptives in both countries. Unlike other forms of drugs, which have primarily been formulated to prevent or cure illness, the oral contraceptive pill was designed to be given to healthy women over long periods of time, making the necessity for regulation and medical monitoring that much more pertinent. Focusing on the USA and Britain, this paper concentrates on the different ways in which each country has monitored and secured the safety of the pill between 1960 and 1970. While the British government decided to phase-out high dose oestrogen contraceptive pills associated with thrombotic disease in 1969, such pills continued to be available in the USA through to the 1980Â s, with measures instead being directed towards supplying better information to patients about the possible side-effects of the pill. The paper explores the reasons for this difference in policy, showing how it was shaped by the particular research orientation of each country as well as the specific legal, medical, social and political traditions within Britain and the USA.

Suggested Citation

  • Marks, Lara, 1999. ""Not just a statistic": the history of USA and UK policy over thrombotic disease and the oral contraceptive pill, 1960s-1970s," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(9), pages 1139-1155, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:49:y:1999:i:9:p:1139-1155
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(99)00156-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:49:y:1999:i:9:p:1139-1155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.