Anyway, I later developed ED, erectile dysfunction, and was referred by my GP to the same specialist who had been the urologist who had dealt with the prostate problem. And as he knew me, and was at that time being asked by the drug manufacturers to take on a trial of a drug which was supposedly going to be of benefit to people with erectile dysfunction, he asked whether I would be prepared to be part of the group on whom it was to be trialled. He explained very carefully the possible side effects, which were manifold, and explained that it was a double-blind trial, which meant that neither he nor I would know whether or not the medication which I was given was in fact the real thing or a placebo. I was quite happy to accept this risk of possible side effects. Partially the reason for taking the trial was self-interest in so far as it could be of benefit to me, and partially it was because I know that medical advances cannot be made unless people are prepared to enter into trials.

 

I know that there have been some very, very nasty problems - no names, no pack drill - but this was something with which I was prepared to go along.

It’s something which I realise is extremely important. I know that great strides are constantly being made. And unless research is tested on human beings, as well as on such lab animals as are necessary, the results aren’t going to be totally fully understood. Clinical trials are necessary for all drugs. I have been the beneficiary of drugs which have previously been trialled by other people, and if I’m in a position to do the same for the next generation then there’s no reason at all that I shouldn’t do so. 

In the event I realised that I was in fact on the placebo, because there was no possible recognisable benefit derived during the many months on which I was on this trial. And I suppose one can say that the only beneficial side effect is that after the trial per se had finished, all persons who had entered into the trial, whether or not they had been on the original drug or on the placebo, were for several months provided with the actual drug itself, prior to its having come onto the market.

 

 

No. It was totally pointless. There were regular questionnaires which were required to be completed after each session, after each - I forget for how long it went, I forget whether it was a month or two months or what will you. And these questionnaires included whether there was any noticeable effect, what one’s psychological view was, whether one felt - how one felt - whether one felt that one was losing one’s manhood, one’s masculinity, all sorts of things of that nature. They were very interesting psychological questions actually. But it didn’t worry me in any way.

 

 

It was proven to me when I was given the real drug, because that did have an effect [laughs].

 

 

Oh, not at all. If I’m part of a clinical trial I know that it, one has to go ahead with it. One undertakes these things seriously. It’s not a lightly taken decision.

 

It’s quite important if one is doing a test to see to what extent we know that a particular drug has an impact on the people who are taking it, and you must have a control group who are given a placebo, who are given something other than the drug, against which to compare those results. The fascinating thing of course is the number of times that people on the placebo have satisfied themselves that they have received some beneficial effect.

I know that there is a great, shall we say, conspiracy theory [laughs] about big pharma, and up to a point I keep an open mind about this. It is big business. There are multi millions of pounds involved. And I don’t for one second begrudge the profits that the big pharmaceutical companies make, because I know how much it costs them to start new drugs. Whether they sometimes abuse the relationship they have with some medical practitioners, I’m in no position to judge or pass comment. I can see that it could happen.