New Research Shows Dangers of Condoms in HIV Prevention

Culture of Life Foundation & Institute ^ | January 13, 2004 | Culture of Life Foundation & Institute

[Polycarp IV]

CULTURE & COSMOS

January 13, 2004 Volume 1, Number 23

New Research Shows Dangers of Condoms in HIV Prevention

Availability of condoms statistically increase promiscuity and risk of contracting HIV according to medical experts who presented their findings on the "ABC" approach to the HIV/Pandemic in Washington, DC last week. The presentations, hosted by the Medical Institute for Sexual Health, were critical of the insistence by some NGO's and policy makers that the "C" (condom) approach will stem the tide of the pandemic.

"20 years into the pandemic there is no evidence that more condoms leads to less AIDS," stated Dr. Edward C. Green of Harvard's' Center for Population and Development Studies. Citing data on condom availability in many African counties, Green went on to say that "we are not seeing what we expected: that higher levels of condom availability result in lower HIV prevalence." Dr. Norman Hearst of the University of California --- San Francisco supported this analysis with statistics on Kenya, Botswana, and other countries, which show an increasingly alarming pattern of increased condom sale correlation with rising HIV prevalence by year.

Promotion of the "safe-sex" message has reportedly increased numbers of sexual partners. The spread of HIV is a behavioral problem, according to Green, who said that "having multiple sexual partners drives AIDS epidemics. If people did not have multiple sex partners, epidemics would not develop or, once developed, be sustained." He continued, "over a lifetime, it is the number of sexual partners [that matter]. Condom levels are found to be non-determining of HIV infection levels."

Unfortunately, Hearst stated, we are "raising a generation of young people in Africa that believe that condoms will prevent HIV." This is concerning because condoms are not 100% effective, even when used properly. According to Hearst, "the most recent Met-analysis came up with 80%. But even if it is 90%, over time it's the question of when, not if. You don't want to give people a false sense of security and A and B are better in the long term."

In other cases, often reported by proponents of the safe-sex message, countries such as Thailand saw incidence rates for HIV decrease after the government mandated 100% condom use in brothels. Unfortunately, according to Hearst and Stoneburner, proponents rarely look closer at the data, and in such instances behavior change had much more to do with the decreased rates of transmission. "This is usually attributed to 100% condom use, but visits to sex workers declined by 60%. They did so out of fear and risk avoidance."

It is the behavior change advocated by the "A" and "B" approach that is additionally supported by data, such as in the famed Uganda case. According to Dr. Rand Stoneburner (formerly of the WHO and an independent advisor to USAID), "declines of HIV in Uganda are linked to behavior change [and] include primary risk avoidance with a 65% decline in causal sex." The Ugandan government, which promoted abstinence and faithfulness, helped bring about a 75% decline in HIV prevalence among 15-19 age group, 60% in the 20-24, and a 54% decline overall by 1998.

Stoneburner and others believe the change was due to different language used. In Uganda, President Museveni reportedly repeated to Ugandans "you are going to die if you don't stop this!" whereas in other countries, there is little talk of death. Stoneburner pointed out "25% of South Africans don't believe HIV causes AIDS" and in many countries "they do not talk about death links to AIDS." This information proves the unfortunate effectiveness of the "safe sex" message that increasingly places individuals at risk for HIV transmission and STDS worldwide.

Copyright---Culture of Life Foundation. Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required.

Culture of Life Foundation 1413 K Street, NW, Suite 1000 Washington DC 20005 Phone: (202) 289-2500 Fax: (202) 289-2502 E-mail: clf@culture-of-life.org Website: www.colfi.org

[Polycarp IV]

Dear Colleague,

The drumbeat for condoms continues as does the evidence mount that they are not the silver bullet for the HIV/AIDs pandemic. We report today on evidence presented in Washington DC a few days ago by a researchers from Harvard and the University of California - San Francisco. It is vital that this information be distributed all over Africa.

Spread the word.

Yours sincerely,

Austin Ruse President

[Polycarp IV]

Your continuing catechesis served up fresh just for you;-)

[Eva]

I had a patient, back in the mid eighties who was an epidemiologist who had been brought to LA to study the AID virus. He told me that condums and rubber gloves would not prevent AIDS because the virus is small enough to pass through microscopic openings in latex. He was advising me to double glove because he said that it was unlikely that the virus would get through both pairs of gloves, but not impossible. He also said that the gov't knew this and a lot more, that they weren't telling the public because they needed to get control of the hysteria surrounding the disease (probably the anti-Gay hysteria, but I didn't ask).

[glorgau]

Executive Summary:

Sluts are more likely to die early.

[Polycarp IV]

Catholic Caucus Poll:

What about the circumstance, discussed on the other thread, of the woman, whose spouse is HIV positive and insists on performing the marital act? Is the woman forbidden from protecting her life by insisting that he use a condom?

Depends on whether its "moral" to recommend Russian roulette in such a case:

condoms are not 100% effective, even when used properly. According to Hearst, "the most recent Met-analysis came up with 80%. But even if it is 90%, over time it's the question of when, not if.

What so you, Catholic Caucus? Would a Pope/Cardinal/Bishop/Priest/"Deacon" be justified in recommending condom use to a woman whose spouse is HIV positive (considering a one in five failure rate)?

[sinkspur]

What so you, Catholic Caucus? Would a Pope/Cardinal/Bishop/Priest/"Deacon" be justified in recommending condom use to a woman whose spouse is HIV positive (considering a one in five failure rate)?

.....if the alternative is certain exposure to HIV.

Finish the sentence, Brian.

[neverdem]

IIRC, for those unaware what the letters of ABC mean:

A = Abstinence from sexual relations until marriage
B = Be faithful to your spouse
C = Condom usage if you're unable to abide by A or B

[Polycarp IV]

You know that condoms have a one in five failure rate in preventing HIV transmission. If she has marital relations with him on any regular basis, with or without a condom, she is going to get HIV.

To counsel ANY marital relations, WITH OR WITHOUT condom use, is condemning the woman to certain exposure.

[Desdemona]

What so you, Catholic Caucus? Would a Pope/Cardinal/Bishop/Priest/"Deacon" be justified in recommending condom use to a woman whose spouse is HIV positive (considering a one in five failure rate)?

Is this a trick question?

(Don't answer that.)

[Polycarp IV]

Its actually a very simple question, not at all complicated. Unfortunately, certain cardinals and other ordained clergy are attempting to make the simple difficult.

[Polycarp IV]

Finish the sentence, Brian.

If the wife tells you they have marital relations once a week, for the next year, without condom use, there are 52 chances for her to get HIV.

With condom use, she has 13 chances to get HIV.

So you as an ordained deacon would counsel her to go ahead, but use a condom, so that instead of definitely being exposed to HIV 52 times, she'll only definitely be exposed to HIV 13 times?

That just does not sound like the mind of Christ, of mercy or compassion, to me.

[Polycarp IV]

she has 13 chances to get HIV.

Correction: 10.3 chances.

[sinkspur]

What's your option, if she's going to have sexual relations anyway?

[Polycarp IV]

The Church can only advise she abstain. There simply are no other options the Church can offer, without falling into heresy or apostacy. Which is the central point you seem not to comprehend.

[IronJack]

"20 years into the pandemic there is no evidence that more condoms leads to less AIDS,"

So, in typical liberal fashion, the Left will insist that we spend another 20 years giving out even MORE condoms, then condemn the Right for not doing enough to eliminate AIDS.

[Polycarp IV]

Bingo!

[B Knotts]

Exactly. Assuming the husband lives enough to perform the act ten times, on average, that will be enough to infect the wife.

To me, this is really indicative of how shallow the thinking is that would embrace evil for practical reasons. They seem to think condoms are magic.

[Polycarp IV]

More on the Belgian heretic:

Contrary to Catholic Teaching Belgian Cardinal Advocates Use of Condoms to Fight AIDS

BRUSSELS, January 13, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels, 70, the left-leaning media favorite to become the next pope, has unleashed another firestorm by publicly advocating the use of condoms as protection from HIV/AIDS. "When someone is seropositive and his partner says: I want to have sexual relations with you -- he doesn't have to do that, if you ask me -- but when he does, he has to use a condom...," said Daneels in a radio interview Sunday.

Speaking on the Kruispunt programme of Dutch Catholic broadcaster RKK, Daneels said, "This (the use of condoms) comes down to protecting yourself in a preventive manner against a disease or death, (it) cannot be entirely morally judged in the same manner as a pure way of birth limitation."

The interview marks the second time in the last few months the Cardinal has publicly stirred controversy over condoms. In October Daneels held a press conference at his residence in which he publicly belittled fellow Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo. Trujillo, head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, repeated the Church's teaching against contraception to a BBC program, and also noted the scientific evidence showing that condoms are not fail-safe protection against AIDS. Cardinal Daneels, was quoted by Reuters saying of Cardinal Trujillo's comments, "I deplore that comment the way it was received. It does not befit a cardinal to deal with the virtue of a product ... I don't know if what he said is reliable."

See the Reuters coverage and related LifeSite coverage:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L12452562.htm
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/oct/03101703.html

______________________________________________________

Belgian Cardinal Holds Press Conference to Slam Curial Cardinal over Statements Against Condoms

MECHELEN, Belgium, October 17, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Belgian Cardinal
Godfried Danneels, 70, the left-leaning media favorite to become the next pope, held a press conference at his residence Wednesday, in which he publicly belittled fellow Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo.

Cardinal Trujillo, head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, repeated the Church's teaching against contraception to a BBC program, and also noted the scientific evidence showing that condoms are not fail-safe protection against AIDS. He suggested that rather than allow the false image of 'safe sex' with condoms, condom packages should warn consumers that they are not reliable protection against the deadly disease.

Cardinal Daneels, was quoted by Reuters saying of Cardinal Trujillo's comments, "I deplore that comment the way it was received. It does not befit a cardinal to deal with the virtue of a product ... I don't know if what he said is reliable."

Beyond the obvious fact that condoms often break, Cardinal Trujillo pointed to scientific evidence that the rubber used in condoms has tiny holes through which the microscopic AIDS virus can easily pass. "The AIDS virus is roughly 450 times smaller than the spermatozoon," he said. "The spermatozoon can easily pass through the 'net' formed by the condom."

See the Reuters report on the
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=healthNews&storyID=3619216§ion=news

See evidence for the condom holes
http://dianedew.com/condom.htm

[Salvation]

Abstinence is the answer!

[Land of the Irish]

Lepers have been with us since the time of Christ. Those knowing of their disease did not force themselves on their spouses, nor society in general. They resigned themselves to exile in the colonies. They accepted their malady as a cross.