Catholic researchers are going to come to conclusions to support the official Catholic position. There’s a lot more confidence in research conducted by independent researchers. The most convincing evidence of condom effectiveness comes from studies of couples in which one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not. Studies of such couples have found low risks of HIV infection among consistent condom users. For example, in three recent studies infection rates were less than 1% per year among consistent condom users. A multicountry European study of 256 HIV-discordant couples followed for an average of 20 months found that not one infection occurred among such couples using condoms during every sex act. As for the CDC, they state on their website “Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing heterosexual sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.”
“Catholic researchers are going to come to conclusions to support the official Catholic position.”
So, you think Catholics are liars?
“There’s a lot more confidence in research conducted by independent researchers.”
Of which there has been absolutely none in the last couple of decades, at least. Perhaps longer. The researchers you believe to be “independent” are in thrall to the universities or other institutions for whom they work, and to those who fund research. Publishing data that show condoms to be risky would bring certain ruin, professionally and personally.
A person would be wiser to believe a man who believes he puts his immortal soul at risk with every lie.
“The most convincing evidence of condom effectiveness comes from studies”
The most convinving evidence comes from the study that showed most studies to be bunk. Rather than trust the results of people who are as bound as any slave to a certain result, I would prefer to look at the results of various approaches. For instance, those African countries that relied on condoms fared very poorly, while those who relied on abstinence fared very well.
“For example, in three recent studies...”
Sorry, recent studies from secular academia are simply not credible. The lavendar mafia is firmly in the saddle. It is much wiser to look at the actual outcome of policies on a national level...not to mention the science that shows latex condoms to have holes large enough to permit passage of the HIV bug.
“As for the CDC, they state on their website “Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing heterosexual sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.”
Uh, huh. And what is meant by “highly?” 70%? 80%? 90%?
Would you play Russian roulette at 90% odds?
Oops, posting before my coffee again.
The CDC is quoted as saying “Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing ****heterosexual**** sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.”
That’s like claiming that aspirin is highly effective in preventing elephants from turning into eels.
The culture of death has for decades now been predicting (and longing for) an epidemic of AIDS among heterosexuals. Hasn’t happened; ain’t gonna happen. Normal sexual activity very rarely results in the transmission of HIV, condom or no condom. Further, in the cases where it is blamed, I think somebody’s lying.
Old joke from way back when AIDS was called “the gay plague,” and there was thought to be a connection with Haiti (other than rampant homosexual prostitution):
Q: What’s the hardest thing about telling your parents that you have AIDS?
A: Convincing them that you’re Haitian.
Anal sex is for a number of medical reasons a very effective way to transmit the virus. This holds whether the sodomized individual is male or female.
Normal sex is for a number of medical reasons a very ineffective way to transmit the virus. This holds for both men and women, although the odds seem to be worse for women.
So, why would the CDC say something as stupid as that condoms prevent something that wasn’t going to happen anyway?
Is there any possible reason other than a desire to deceive?
Here’s something that was posted a couple of months ago:
During the post-pill and pre-HIV period the condom because of its method failure rate of more than 5% and its user failure rate of 15% was despised as a method of family planning. Yet the singular focus of the anti-AIDS campaign over the last 10 years has been to eulogize the protective qualities of the condom as a shield against the pandemic of sexually transmitted diseases (STD). With no vaccine in sight and lacking the moral courage to embrace chastity, contemporary society, by marketing the condom as the solution to the HIV/AIDs pandemic, has put all its eggs in a condom basket. Yet the very experts who promote the condom as a strategic weapon against HIV/AIDs are silent in regard to its failure as a contraceptive. Nor do they highlight the care with which condoms must be ‘stored and transported’, HIV/AIDS epidemiology experts have established that not only is latex heat, cold, light and pressure sensitive but it is also adversely affected by humidity, ozone, air pollutants and deteriorates over time[1]. With this in mind, keeping a condom in a wallet, purse or car glove-box compartment would appear to violate the stringent storage requirements to maintain it in a good condition. In an experiment to test the effectiveness of condoms against HIV, researchers filled condoms with a liquid containing plastic molecules analogous to the AIDS virus: i.e., they were similar in shape and size. These plastic particles were placed inside a condom with a glass plunger inside the condom. This arrangement was designed to imitate many of the ‘environmental’ factors operative during intercourse. By testing condoms in an active in-vitro (test tube) system which simulated key physical conditions that influence viral particle leakage an accurate understanding could be obtained of the protective attributes of condoms during actual coitus. The test quantitatively addresses pressure, pH, temperature, surfactant properties (surface tension) and anatomical geometry. Leakage of HIV-sized particles through latex condoms was detectable for as many as 29 out of the 89 condoms tested. This result represents a failure rate of 30%.[2] Highly qualified researchers in the field of latex technology are now calling into question the merit of promoting condoms as a method of stopping the transmission of HIV-AIDS. For instance C.M. Rowland, Ph.D., editor of the journal Rubber Chemistry and Technology, wrote as long ago as 1992 to the Washington Post) stating:
“... Electron micrographs reveal voids (holes) 5 microns in size (50 times larger than the virus), while fracture mechanics analyses, sensitive to the largest flaws present, suggest inherent flaws as large as 50 microns (500 times the size of the virus”.)