By Brian Clowes, PhD

Director of Research Worldwide

Human Life International 

WARNING:  In order to completely and accurately describe the subject matter, this document contains explicit information about human sexuality which is not appropriate for minors or for persons who are morally vulnerable to such material.

Introduction:  Basic Concepts.

     The Underlying Problem.  It is common knowledge among health professionals that sexually-transmitted diseases (STDs), some of which are incurable and/or fatal, have found fertile ground to multiply in societies that permit and even celebrate all forms of permissive sex.  Unfortunately, most people, for fear of appearing "backwards" or "repressive," treat this glaringly obvious fact like a basilisk -- they dare not look at it or even speak about it.

     The response of most `developed' world governments at every level, and the reaction of various social service agencies to this explosion of STDs, was as predictable as it was pitiful:  They took the inherently Humanistic position that Americans (not just teenagers) are mere animals.  Since they can't be trusted to control their sexual urges, we might as well make it as safe for them as possible to have sex with whomever they please.

     The government's weapons of choice were not chastity and monogamy, but `education' and condoms.  Even Bill Clinton's Surgeon General, Joycelyn Elders, sported a "rubber tree" on her desk -- festooned, of course, with condoms.

     And so, with intriguing names like "Arouse," "Embrace," "Excita," and "Pleaser," condoms crowd pharmacy shelves and restroom walls, leering at potential users and proclaiming the merits of "family planning" and "safe sex" on their vividly-colored packages.

     Unfortunately, members of the public uncritically accept the government, and the condom manufacturers, at their word.  And nobody (except a few pro-lifers, who are universally ignored) seems to be asking the most vital question of all.

     If condoms are so effective at preventing pregnancy and AIDS transmission, why do nations that stress their use continue to experience a rapidly-escalating rate of teen pregnancy and an exploding AIDS epidemic?

     Due to the highly charged aspects of the issues related to contraception (i.e., school-based clinics, the teen pregnancy "epidemic," and the spread of AIDS), there is much conflicting information on the effectiveness of the most commonly-used nonpermanent true contraceptive method in the world, the male condom, at preventing pregnancy, AIDS, and sexually transmitted diseases.

     In order to conduct an intelligent conversation on this topic, we must first review a few basic facts.

     Types of Condoms.  Three types of male condoms are commonly available today;

(1)  By far the most commonly used condoms are made from natural rubber latex.  These are the most effective at preventing pregnancy and STDs, and make up about 97 percent of all condom sales in the United States.

(2)  A small number of condoms are made from the intestinal caecum of lambs, and are called "natural skin," "natural membrane" or "lambskin" condoms.  Experts generally agree that skin condoms are not effective as latex condoms at preventing AIDS and STDs.

(3)  A third type, generally becoming more available, are the condoms made from synthetic materials including polyurethane.  These are more resistant to deterioration than latex condoms and are generally believed to provide a similar level of protection against pregnancy and STDs [1].

     Definition of Terms.  The book Contraceptive Technology is the most authoritative source of information on all methods of birth control in the world today.  This two-inch thick book is often referred to as the "family planner's bible," and is revised every few years in order to include updated information.  The latest edition was published in 2004, and it is considered by family planners to be the "last word" on all matters contraceptive.

     Family planners use four terms when referring to the failure rate of a contraceptive or abortifacient method;

(1)  The "efficacy" of a birth control method refers to the protection its users receive under ideal conditions.

(2)  The "effectiveness" of a method refers to the protection its users receive under actual conditions of use, and includes user error.

(3)  The "method failure rate" refers to malfunctions of the method itself when a couple use it perfectly.  For condoms, the method failure rate is two percent.  This does not mean that two percent of condom uses will result in pregnancy.  It means that, if there are one hundred couples that use a condom perfectly over an entire year of use, only two will experience pregnancy.  Since the average couple in the United States has sexual intercourse 83 times a year, this means that, among one hundred perfect method users, there will be two pregnancies for every 8,300 uses of the condom.

(4)  The "user failure rate" reflects not perfect use, but typical use, and includes all user errors.  According to Contraceptive Technology, 15 of 100 typical condom-using couples will experience pregnancy within the first year of use.[2]

     The basic problem is as follows.  No matter how much `safe(r) sex' education is taught, no matter how many bowls of free condoms are left in plain view, and no matter how much contraceptive marketing is propagated, there are a number of mechanical and human factors that simply cannot be controlled [3];

• Condoms break and slip off;
• They age.  One study found that the breakage rate for condoms increased from 3.6% for new condoms to as high as 18.6% for condoms several years old.[4]
• They deteriorate in even the best of conditions, but even more rapidly in extremely cold or hot situations.  Condom wrappers recommend storing the product at temperatures between 59 and 88 degrees Fahrenheit.  One researcher found that, at major condom distribution points in New Jersey and New York, boxes of condoms were left outdoors in the ice and snow during the dead of winter.  During the summer months, the researcher took photographs of eggs frying on the floors of dozens of trucks and containers where condoms were stored in temperatures exceeding 180 degrees.[5]  High temperatures cause oxidation and freezing temperatures cause crystallization in some of the chemical compounds that make up condoms, leading to cracking, drying, shrinking and drastic loss of flexibility and strength.  Keep in mind that condoms exported from the United States sit in uninsulated shipping containers in extreme weather conditions for even longer periods of time;
• If taken out of the package and left unused for a long period of time, they are liable to ozone deterioration, which causes damage invisible to the eye;
• Improper use of oil-based lubricants can degrade them;
• They get broken in their packages;
• They have allowed rates of manufacturing defects.  The present acceptable quality limit (AQL) for North American condom manufacturers is 99.6% of condoms free of leaks.  The British AQL is 97%, and the Dutch AQL is 96.5%;
• The users are caught up in passion and do not properly follow the ten- to sixteen-step process for safe usage [6];
• The users are compromised by the use of alcohol, marijuana, illegal drugs, prescription and over-the-counter drugs, or exhaustion; and
• Bodily secretions can get around and over a condom even if it performs perfectly.

The Primary Danger -- Not Pores, But Catastrophic Failure.

     "Counting on condoms is flirting with death."

--   Dr. Helen Singer-Kaplan, founder of the Human Sexuality Program at the New York Weill Cornell Medical Center, Cornell University.[7]

     Overview.  Although latex condoms appear to occasionally be permeable to the AIDS virus, by far the greatest danger of infection lies in their propensity to burst, tear and slip off.

     Even if only a few HIV viruses did pass through a porous condom, the risk of infection would still be extremely small; but in those cases where condoms fail catastrophically, massive exposure to the HIV virus is inevitable.  In cases of failure during intercourse with an HIV-infected person, there is the distinct possibility of a protracted and extremely unpleasant death.

     The Studies.  The frequency of condom breakage depends upon many factors, including the type of lubricant used and the brand of condom.  Contraceptive Technology tallied the results of fifteen studies involving a total of 25,184 condoms used during heterosexual intercourse and found that 4.64 percent of all of the condoms broke and 3.44 percent of them partially or completely slipped off, for a total of 8.08 percent, or about one in twelve.[8]

     Figure 1 is a summary of these studies.

Figure 1

A Summary of Major Studies on Condom Breakage and Slippage Rates

Summary of Studies

Average breakage rate of all condoms:    1,168/25,184 = 4.64%

Average slippage rate of all condoms:      636/18,495   = 3.44%

Total failure rate of all condoms:                                    8.08%

     According to Contraceptive Technology, the condom's user effectiveness rate is 85 percent [9].  This means that, under real-world conditions, a woman whose sexual partners use condoms for every act of sexual intercourse has a 15 percent chance of becoming pregnant in a year.

     Figure 2 shows the chances of pregnancy for a woman whose sexual partners faithfully use condoms for 83 average annual instances of sexual intercourse.[10]

     Keep in mind that these are the lowest rates that can generally be expected, since they assume 100% condom usage.

Figure 2

Probability of Pregnancy Over Time for Women Whose Sexual Partners Always Use Condoms

     According to United States Census Bureau sources, about 6.8 million couples use condoms as their primary means of contraception in the USA.[11]  15 percent of this number means that about one million unwanted pregnancies occur every year due to condoms breaking, a number equivalent to half of the unintended pregnancies in the United States annually!

     This experience is mirrored in many other surveys of people who use condoms under real-world conditions;

• 1,609 of 4,666 women (34.5 percent) obtaining abortions at the Leeds Marie Stopes International abortion clinic were using condoms that failed [12].
• 27% of the abortions performed at Paris' Hospital St. Louis are done because of condom failure.[13]
• A 1996 study of students requesting "emergency contraception" at the Rusholme Health Center in Manchester claimed condom failure.[14]
• In Botswana, HIV prevalence among pregnant urban women rose from 27 percent to a staggering 45 percent from 1993 to 2001 as condoms sales tripled.  In Cameroon, adult HIV prevalence rose from 3 percent to 9 percent as condom sales rose from six million to 15 million during the same period [15].
• Cambodia instituted a "100% Condom Program" early on in its fight against AIDS.  Condom use rocketed from 99,000 in 1994 to 16 million in 2001.  Reported HIV infections more than kept pace, soaring from 14 in 1994 to more than 16,000 in 2001 [16].
• When United States Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders was Arkansas Health Director from 1987 to 1992, she pushed condoms by every means possible, including in 24 high schools.  The results were predictable.  The teen pregnancy rate in Arkansas rose 17 percent between 1989 to 1992, the syphilis rate among teenagers rose 130 percent, and the HIV rate rose 150 percent [17].

     Figure 3 includes many quotes from leading experts who have shown in studies that condoms are dismal failures at preventing pregnancies.

     Understandably, for practical and ethical reasons, few studies have actually used live couples to test HIV transmission rates.  A University of Miami Medical School study showed that three out of 10 women whose HIV-infected husbands faithfully used condoms contracted AIDS-Related Complex (ARC) in an 18-month period.[18]

     This translates into an infection rate of 21 percent per year, 38 percent in two years, 51 percent in three years, 70 percent in five years, and 91 percent in 10 years.  One article in The Lancet concluded that

The possible consequences of condom failure when one partner is HIV infected are serious enough and the likelihood of failure sufficiently high that condom use by risk groups should not be described as `safe sex.'...  Condoms have a substantial failure rate:  13-15% of women whose male partners use condoms as the sole method of contraception become pregnant within one year.[19]

     Figure 4 consists of quotes from leading experts who believe that condoms are ineffective at preventing AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.

     The effectiveness of condoms at preventing AIDS is obviously much lower than their effectiveness at preventing pregnancy, for two primary reasons;

• A couple can conceive during only a fraction of the menstrual cycle (the "fertility window"), about five to seven days per cycle.  It is possible, however, to be infected with HIV at any time during the menstrual cycle.
• A sperm cell is massively larger than an HIV virus.  The head of a sperm cell is about 3,000 to 5,000 nanometers in diameter, and an HIV virus is about 100 to 120 nanometers in diameter (1 nanometer = one billionth of a meter).[20]

Condoms and Leakage.

     The Primary Point to Remember.  There is a lot of debate in the pro-life community today over whether or not latex condoms have pores large enough to leak the HIV virus.

     As this booklet will describe, the latex condom does indeed occasionally leak the HIV virus.  However, the following point cannot be stressed enough:

The risk of HIV leakage by latex condoms is trivial when compared to the risk of massive exposure to the HIV virus caused by the condom's propensity to frequently break, tear or slip off.

     Pro-lifers should not allow themselves to be dragged into a long, drawn-out discussion on whether or not condoms have pores big enough to leak the HIV virus.  This is a distraction from more important issues, because nobody can prove on the spot whether or not they actually do leak the virus.  After all, how many people carry a portable electron microscope around with them?  There are hundreds of studies on both sides of this question.

     In any discussion of condoms, pro-lifers should stay on much firmer ground and speak about the condom's frequent catastrophic failure rate.

     A Complicated Question.  Much debate exists over whether latex condoms provide protection against the HIV virus.  The Centers for Disease Control (CDCs) assert that unbroken and properly used latex condoms can block the AIDS virus.[21]  The basis for this claim is a series of studies that show that latex condoms are 99 percent or more effective at stopping the AIDS virus.

     Two serious flaws are inherent in each of these studies:

(1)  An extremely small sample size was used in each study (only one to 10 condoms of each brand); and

(2)  In-vivo conditions of actual intercourse were not simulated.

     The inherent, naturally occurring flaws in natural rubber (latex) range from 5 to 70 microns in diameter.[22]  The average sperm cell is about 5 microns in diameter, and the average AIDS virus is about 0.1 micron in size.[23]  This means that, in terms of size, an AIDS virus can pass through a latex flaw as easily as a house cat can walk through an open double garage door.  Pro?abortionists and others loudly deny this fact, but offer no evidence whatsoever to back up their claims.

     However, before concluding that latex condoms do not protect against the AIDS virus, two factors must be taken into account:

(1)  Condom advocates stress that water molecules "stick" to each other through hydrogen bonding.  Therefore, they say, it is very doubtful indeed that an AIDS virus in a water-based suspension of any type would be able to pass through a hole even 100 times its own diameter in the absence of motion, friction, pressure and corrosion stresses.  The clumped water molecules "bridge" the condom gaps, in other words.

     However, condoms do indeed leak water, as shown by the standard condom permeability test.  This involves filling a condom with 300 milliliters of water, tying it off, and then rolling it on paper to assist in detecting leaks.

     In one study, scientists deliberately punctured condoms with holes about 10 microns in diameter, then subjected them to the standard water permeability test.  75 percent of the condoms passed the test, despite the fact that they were riddled with holes 100 times the diameter of the AIDS virus.[24]

     In a second test, holes were artificially introduced into condoms of several brands.  Those containing holes 1 micron in size -- ten times the diameter of the HIV virus -- passed the leakage test 90 percent of the time.  In this latter test, a surfactant (which reduces water cohesion) was introduced into the liquid.  Most condom lubricants act as surfactants.[25]

     These studies prove that condoms do indeed leak water, regardless of what its surface tension may be.

(2)  Latex condoms are "double-dipped," meaning that all or most of the voids left from the first layer will be filled by the second.  Repeated SEM (scanning electron microscope) photos of stretched condoms show no apparent voids, even at a magnification of 2,000X.[26]

     Once again, this fact is irrelevant in light of the fact that, as shown above, a large percentage of condoms that have passed the standard water leak text do indeed leak HIV-sized particles.

     An Engineering Analysis of an SEM Image.  Point (2) above is repeatedly used by condom advocates to argue that latex condoms are extremely effective at blocking the HIV virus.  Indeed, when a latex condom is stretched and viewed under the extreme magnification possible with a scanning electron microscope, no pores seem to be present.

     When an SEM image of stretched latex shows no pores, we must remember that stretching applies only one type of stress on a material:  Uniform lateral stress.  This is the kind of stress that is applied to a child's balloon when it is blown up -- equal and constant pressure is applied to every square inch of the surface of the balloon.

     An SEM cannot provide us with an accurate "picture" of pores in a condom under conditions of actual use, because the SEM can only provide still shots of a condom with uniform lateral stress applied to it.

     It is physically impossible to simultaneously simulate for an SEM picture the other four types of stress that are applied to a condom during intercourse:

(1)  pressure stress (perpendicular to the axis of the lateral stress).  This would be like taking the child's balloon and stretching it from pole to pole;

(2)  shear stress (high twisting or angular stresses at critical points).  This would be like holding the child's balloon at both ends and twisting the poles in opposite directions;

(3)  friction stress (abrasion occurring during lateral movement between two surfaces in contact).  This would be like taking the child's balloon and rubbing it across a sticky surface; and 

(4)  corrosion stress caused by a mixture of body fluids and lubricants, whose effect is greatly enhanced by the repeated and simultaneous application of mechanical stresses.

     To say that a latex condom is safe because it shows no pores when only one out of five types of stress is applied to it is like saying that a new type of jeep is safe for heavy off-road use because it can be driven in a straight line at 25 MPH on a smooth and level road without falling apart. 

     The fact that latex condoms do indeed contain pores was highlighted by a major 1992 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) study, the first to simulate actual conditions of sexual intercourse.  This study showed detectable leakage of HIV-sized particles in one-third of the condoms tested.[27]  Significantly, all of these condoms had previously passed the standard water leakage test.

     Again, those who debate the merits and demerits of condoms should remember that the head of a human sperm cell is approximately 50 microns (0.002 inches) in diameter, and the head of an HIV virus is about 0.1 microns in diameter.[28]  This means that a sperm cell, which is effectively blocked by an unbroken latex condom, is about 100 million times more massive than an HIV virus.

     This contrast in size is proportional to a five-ton bull elephant standing next to a small housefly.

Condoms and the Prevention of Sexually Transmitted Diseases.

     "There is no such thing as safe sex for someone contemplating sex with an HIV-positive person."

--   Dr. Michael Gottlieb, the scientist who made the original report to the Centers for Disease Control on gay-related immune deficiency (GRID), which was later relabeled AIDS.[29]

     Health authorities agree that condoms (when used perfectly and when they do not break, leak or slip) effectively block such sexually transmitted diseases as gonorrhea and syphilis.  However, condom misuse or breakage can cause massive exposure to these diseases, just as with the HIV virus.

     What's more, even consistent perfect use of unbroken condoms will not protect against STDs that are spread by skin-to-skin contact, such as human papillomavirus (HPV) and herpes simplex virus (HSV), which frequently infect the entire genital area.  Finally, many STDs, such as gonorrhea and herpes, are transmitted by oral sex, which is usually practiced with multiple sexual partners.[30]

     These problems partly account for a resurgence in certain STDs;

• Genital chlamydial infection is the most common bacterial STD in the United States, and is the leading cause of preventable infertility and ectopic pregnancies.  Half a million new cases of chlamydia (the most common sexually transmitted disease) are reported each year.[31]
• Genital warts (condyloma acuminata) are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV), the most common viral STD in the United States, accounting for three million new cases each year.  HPV is present in an estimated 50 percent of all sexually active young women, and, as with other STDs, is associated with multiple sexual partners and with earlier intercourse.
• There are about 400,000 new cases of gonorrhea in the United States each year, many of which are caused by strains resistant to treatment, and up to one-fourth of all infected men have no symptoms.  Gonorrhea can also infect other mucous membranes, including the mouth.  The disease can have extremely serious consequences if left untreated, including sterility, pelvic abscesses and severe health problems for infants born to infected mothers.[32]
• Hepatitis B is a particularly dangerous problem in some developing countries.  It can lead to chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, cancers, hepatic (liver) failure and death.  There is no cure for Hepatitis B, and up to 20 percent of the general population in many developing countries show signs of infection.
• Herpes genitalis is caused by the herpes simplex virus (HSV) and infects about 30 million people in the United States today, most of whom show no symptoms.  Those who do show symptoms may have painful ulcers in the genital or mouth area.
• Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is a result of infection with other STDs and viruses/bacteria such as gonorrhea and E. Coli.  PID afflicts one million American women each year, 20 percent of whom require hospitalization.  PID also inflames the Fallopian tubes and is a leading cause of ectopic pregnancy.
• Syphilis, one of the deadliest STDs, recently reached its highest level in 40 years, with 134,000 people in the United States newly infected in 1990.[33]  Untreated syphilis can lead to rashes, lesions, paralysis, aneurysms, blindness and death.

     Health professionals often assert that there are "epidemics" of teen pregnancy, AIDS, alcoholism and drug use.  Some of these allegations are exaggerated and are not supported with proper statistical analysis.

     But declarations of an epidemic of STDs are certainly not exaggerated.  With more than 100 million people infected with one or more of 20 STDs in the United States alone, it is unrealistic to expect that a paper-thin, nearly weightless sheath of polyurethane or latex will slow down the epidemic.

     The only way to completely eradicate all STDs is to follow God's plan for our sexual lives:  Abstinence before marriage and fidelity after.

     Of course, the sex educators and condom sellers tell us that this is not a "realistic" solution.

     They are wrong.

     Since abstinence/fidelity is the only solution that will work, it is the only realistic solution as well.  Perhaps if the health professionals struggle unsuccessfully for another decade or two trying to contain the STD epidemic with impractical means, they too will reach the same conclusion.  Unfortunately, the price of their education will be steep indeed -- millions of lives needlessly lost and more millions of lives spent in unnecessary misery.

Teenagers and Condoms.

     The New York Times Speaks.  In 1997, The New York Times front-paged a study alleging that passing out condoms in school does not increase teenage sex, which flies in the face of common sense.[34]

     If schools passed out coupons for free beer at local ABC stores, would beer consumption by teenagers increase?

     Of course it would!  Anyone who says otherwise is just not in touch with reality.

     Saying that passing out condoms does not increase sexual behavior is kind of like saying that passing out cars and keys does not increase driving behavior.

     In any case, the lead researcher of the study cited by the Times was none other than Sally Guttmacher, daughter of Alan Guttmacher, who did more to spread abortion and contraception around the world than anyone else in history.  The study was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which pours millions of dollars into organizations that promote condoms.

     The Times seems to be completely blind to preordained conclusions brought on by a massive conflict of interest, but only if such conflicts exist on the anti-life side of various issues.

     Would the Times accept such a study (much less put it on the front page) if it was conducted by a well-known pro-life priest and funded by the Vatican?  Of course not!  The Times would dismiss the study without even reading it.

     But not if it has the `right' conclusions ...

     In light of their dismal record, the only thing more illogical than adults using condoms is adults providing condoms to teenagers, especially in the public schools.

     Rebuttal by the Alan Guttmacher Institute.  An article in the Alan Guttmacher Institute's Family Planning Perspectives quoted an annual condom failure rate of 18.4 percent among teenaged girls under 18 years old.  This means that more than half of the users will be pregnant within three years.

     The authors also said that "These rates are understated because of the substantial under-reporting of abortion among single women; if abortion reporting was complete, failure rates would be 1.4 times as high as they appear high."[35]

     Results of School Condom Studies.  These figures have been borne out in studies of those public schools that have distributed condoms to their students.

     One writer describes the dismal results of one of the first free-condom programs to be instituted at a high school in the United States;

     In the three years since this [Adams City, Colorado] high school became one of the first to hand out condoms, the birth rate has soared to 31% above the national average of 58.1 births per 1,000 students [annually].

     Last year, 76 of Adams City students became teen mothers.  This year, more than 100 births are expected.  That's left people at this school, recognized throughout Colorado for its cutting-edge educational and social programs, searching for explanations."[36]

International Case Studies Showing Condom Ineffectiveness Against HIV/AIDS.

     Uganda.  In 1986, President Yoweri Museveni took office and immediately started an intensive campaign to change the widespread incidence of risky sexual behavior in Uganda.

     In 1991, Uganda had one of the highest adult HIV infection rates in the world.  Fifteen percent of all adults in the country were infected.  Ten years later, Uganda had cut its HIV infection rate by two-thirds, to only five percent.  It was the only nation in Africa that cut its HIV infection rate during this time period, and its decline in HIV prevalence was the greatest of any country in the world.

     The key to this tremendous decline was an approach that other nations declined to embrace:  The ABC Program, or Abstain from sex until marriage, Be faithful to your partner, and use Condoms if you do not practice abstinence or fidelity.  The entire focus of the message was not simply to "condomize" the population, but to reduce risky sexual behavior.

     The consistent broadcasting of the ABC message through all governmental, educational, religious and communications networks, in time, built up what researchers called a "highly effective social vaccine against HIV," or a massive behavioral change among the people of the nation.  The 2000-2001 Ugandan Demographic and Health Survey found that 93 percent of Ugandans had changed their sexual behavior to avoid HIV/AIDS.

     According to the Heritage Foundation, the primary lessons learned from the Uganda experience are;

(1)  High-risk sexual behaviors can be discouraged and replaced by healthier lifestyles.  Ugandans gradually accepted what they call "zero grazing," or faithfulness to one partner.

(2)  Abstinence and marital fidelity appear to be the most important factors in preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS.  Contrary to all expectations, young Ugandans widely embraced the pro-abstinence message.  From 1989 to 1995, the percent of unmarried young men having sex plunged from 60 percent to 23 percent, and the percent of unmarried young women having sex dropped from 53 percent to 16 percent.[37]  This proves that teenagers are not mere animals who are helpless slaves of their "raging hormones."

(3)  Condoms do not play the primary role in reducing HIV/AIDS transmission.  As President Museveni himself remarked, "We are being told that only a thin piece of rubber stands between us and the death of our continent.  Condoms have a role to play as a means of protection, especially in couples who are HIV-positive, but they cannot become the main means of stemming the tide of AIDS."[38]  The Ugandan government targeted only extremely high-risk groups, including prostitutes, with condoms.  The vast majority of Ugandans rejected the use of condoms.  Anne Peterson, M.D., USAID's Director of Global Health, says that "Condoms play a role.  They are better than nothing, but the core of Uganda's success story is big A, big B, and little C."[39]

     In stark contrast to Uganda, the countries with the highest rate of condom availability still have the world's highest AIDS rates -- Zimbabwe, Botswana, South Africa and Kenya.[40]

(4)  Religious organizations are crucial participants in the fight against AIDS [41].  Most condom-promoting organizations believe that purely secular organizations should have a monopoly in the battle against HIV/AIDS, and that religious organizations have no place in the fray.  From the very beginning of the ABC program, Christian, Jewish and Muslim faith-based organizations played a central role.

     The ABC program has been intensively studied and deemed effective by many leading international health organizations, including;

• the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which says that "This dramatic decline in [HIV/AIDS] prevalence is unique worldwide, and has been the subject of intense scrutiny;"[42]
• the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS);
• the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO); and
• the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies.[43]

     Despite the obvious success of the Ugandan ABC program, which has undoubtedly saved hundreds of thousands of lives, condom promoters continue to discount abstinence in favor of programs that have been proven ineffective.

     For example, the Global HIV Prevention Working Group issued a July 2002 report entitled Mobilization for HIV Prevention:  A Blueprint for Action, which emphasizes sex education, condom distribution, needle exchange programs and increased availability of and access to anti-retroviral drugs in its program.  It briefly mentions Uganda's success story, but attributes its drops in HIV infection rates primarily to massive condom promotion and distribution programs, which did not actually occur in the country [44].

     In reality, condoms do not impede the spread of AIDS.  In 2004, the journal Studies in Family Planning concluded that "No clear examples have emerged yet of a country that has turned back a generalised epidemic primarily by means of condom promotion."[45]

     The Philippines and Thailand.  The second real-life example of how condoms fail to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS is presented by the Philippines and Thailand, two Southeastern Asian nations with approximately the same populations.

     In 1984, the first case of HIV was detected in both of these nations.  By 1987, Thailand had 112 cases of AIDS, and the Philippines had 135 cases.  In 1991, the World Health Organization predicted that, by 1999, Thailand would have 70,000 deaths from the disease, and the Philippines would have 85,000 deaths.

     In 1991, both nations took concrete and comprehensive measures against the spread of the HIV virus -- but both directed their efforts in completely different directions.

     The Thai Minister of Health enacted a "100% Condom Use Program."  All brothels were required to have supplies of condoms, and condom vending machines were installed in all supermarkets, bars, restaurants, and other public gathering places.  This program was widely accepted and implemented by the people of Thailand.

     Two years later, Rene Bullecer, M.D., received authorization from the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) to establish the organization AIDS-Free Philippines as its official program to combat HIV/AIDS nationwide.  The government signed on to this effort as well.

     By the end of 2003, the disparity in the effectiveness of both types of programs had become glaringly obvious, as shown in this table; [46]

     This table shows that the Thai HIV infection rate is eighty times higher than the Filipino HIV infection rate.

     The current rate of HIV infection in the United States, with all of our sex education, all of our sexual freedom, all of our advanced antiviral drugs, and all of our billions of condoms, is 3,900 per million, thirty times higher than in the Philippines.[47]

     What lesson does this teach us?

     USAID has concluded that the reason that the Philippines has such a low incidence of HIV/AIDS is that youth have a very high rate of abstinence and married people largely remain faithful to their spouses.  The USAID report grudgingly admitted that "The Catholic Church must be credited with influencing sexual behavior."[48]

     `Abstinence has a High Failure Rate.'  Pro-condom groups often denigrate abstinence because they say it is ineffective.  For example, A poster distributed by `Catholics' for a Free Choice says that "Abstinence has a high failure rate."[49]  The idea behind this slogan is that people get passionate and engage in sexual intercourse despite intentions or formal vows to the contrary.

     This is an illogical and inconsistent allegation.  Failures are not attributed to any method of birth control if it is simply not used.  If a formal study of condoms finds that several pregnancies resulted from couples intending to use condoms but failing to do so, these pregnancies will properly not be attributed to the condoms themselves.

     The same criteria should be applied to abstinence.  If, for whatever reason, a couple engage in sexual intercourse, resulting exposure to pregnancy or STDs cannot be attributed to abstinence, because it was not used.

     They Simply Refuse to "Get It."  Despite the stunning success of Uganda at reducing its AIDS epidemic, and the Philippines at avoiding it altogether, population controllers, "family planners" and pro-condom ideologues continue to vigorously promote programs that are proven failures.  These groups and people have the attitude that theirs is the only "realistic" solution to the AIDS crisis, even when they are confronted with abundant and vivid evidence to the contrary.

     Why do they do this, in light of the fact that they are obviously causing many deaths and much misery?

(1)  This is the result of a venerable mindset that holds that human beings are essentially no different from animals in the area of sexuality, and that they have either no free will or greatly diminished free will.[50]  This is an old and outdated philosophy, and must be jettisoned in favor of more modern and effective thinking.  Unfortunately, the people who hold this quaintly antiquated viewpoint are usually the "family planning" and "reproductive health" experts who fund and execute programs involving condom distribution.

(2)  It's their job.  If they give up their hold on condoms, they might be out looking for gainful employment.  Peddling condoms is a very profitable venture indeed, and the resulting income must be protected, regardless of the health risks to those using the product.  In 1987, the Los Angeles Times reported that "The condom industry has launched an intensive campaign to weaken, delay or possibly shut down a federally funded Los Angeles study of the effectiveness of condoms in preventing transmission of the AIDS virus."[51]

(3)  Condoms are part of the web of "progressive" thinking that is more rigidly dogmatic than the beliefs of any religion.  One of the precepts of this mode of thinking is that "condoms are good."

(4)  Population controllers and condom pushers are just plain lazy.  It is far easier to thrown condoms at a problem than it is to go through all the trouble of changing behavior.

(5)  The organizations that think this way have a strong bias towards racist population control programs.  Lothrop Stoddard sat on the board of Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (later the Planned Parenthood Federation of America).  In Sanger's publication The Birth Control Review, Lothrop vividly portrayed the racist's fear of "differential fertility," a dread that still exists among population controllers today;

... upon the quality of human life all else depends ... none of the colored races shows perceptible signs of declining birth-rate, all tending to breed up to the limits of available subsistence ... It can mean only one thing:  a tremendous and steadily augmenting outward thrust of surplus colored men from overcrowded colored homelands ... But many of these relatively empty [Northern] lands have been definitely set aside by the White man as his own special heritage ...

     His ["colored" man's] outstanding quality is superabundant animal vitality.  In this he easily surpasses all other races.  To it he owes his intense emotionalism.  To it, again, is due his extreme fecundity, the negro being the quickest of breeders.  This abounding vitality shows in many other ways, such as the negro's ability to survive harsh conditions of slavery under which other races have soon succumbed ... black blood, once entering a human stock, seems never really bred out again ...

     White men cannot, under peril of their very race-existence, allow wholesale Asian immigration into White race-areas ... The grim truth of the matter is this:  The whole White race is exposed, immediately or ultimately, to the possibility of social sterilization and final replacement or absorption by the teeming colored races.

     And, of course, the more primitive a type is, the more prepotent it is.  This is why crossings with the negro are uniformly fatal.  Whites, Amerindians, or Asiatics -- all are alike vanquished by the invincible prepotency of the more primitive, generalized, and lower negro blood.

     ... whether we consider interwhite migrations or colored encroachments on White lands, the net result is an expansion of lower and a contraction of higher stocks, the process being thus a disgenic one.

     For race-betterment is such an intensely practical matter!  When peoples come to realize that the quality of the population is the source of all their prosperity, progress, security, and even existence; we shall see much-abused "eugenics" actually moulding social programmes and political policies ... we or the next generation will take in hand the problem of race-depreciation, and segregation of defectives and abolition of handicaps penalizing the better stocks will put an end to our present racial decline.[52]

     Indeed, some have raised a troubling question:  If the USA and the developed world know that condoms are ineffective, why do they keep shipping billions of them to Africa every year?  The ideal form of genocide is that which few expect -- claiming to assist a people while actually helping them to do nothing more than exterminate themselves.

     Despite the proven track record of Uganda's ABC program, many influential organizations and people continue to criticize it and the USA's support of it;

• U.S. Representative Barbara Lee said that "In an age where five million people are newly infected each year and women and girls too often do not have the choice to abstain, an abstinence until marriage program is not only irresponsible, it's really inhuman.  Abstaining from sex is oftentimes not a choice, and therefore their only hope in preventing HIV infection is the use of condoms."[53]
• Adrienne Germain, president of the International Women's Health Coalition (IWHC), said that "The Bush administration position basically condemns people to death by H.I.V./AIDS, and we're talking about tens of millions of people."[54]
• Mary Crewe, Director of the Centre for the Study of AIDS at the University of Pretoria, said that "ABC is a middle-class, middle-aged response to an epidemic, all overlaid with a kind of morality that doesn't hold any more."[55]
• Jonathan Cohen of Human Rights Watch said that "Governments should be promoting condom use, not treating condoms like contraband.  The clear result of restricting access to condoms will be more lives lost to AIDS."[56]
• Stephen Lewis, the United Nations Secretary General's special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, said that "There is no question in my mind that the condom crisis in Uganda is being driven and exacerbated by PEPFAR [the U.S. administration's AIDS assistance program] and by the extreme policies that the administration in the U.S. is now pursuing in the emphasis on abstinence. ... That distortion of the preventive apparatus is resulting in great damage and undoubtedly will cause significant numbers of infections which should never have occurred."[57]
• Paulo Roberto Teixeira, the AIDS Program Coordinator for Brazil's Health Ministry, said that "Millions and millions of young people are having sexual relations.  We cannot talk about abstinence.  It's not real." [58]

     Lying in Order to Sell Condoms.  Edward C. Green, a senior research scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health, and a former condom advocate, has said, "The way condoms are marketed in Africa and other developing parts of the world is as if they were 100 percent safe.  Condoms have brand names like Shield and Protector that gives the impression that they are 100 percent safe."[59]

     This statement is certainly true.  The most powerful visual tool used to market condoms in Africa is the large and colorful billboards that are built next to major thoroughfares and painted on stone walls near stadiums, schools, and other places where large crowds of people regularly congregate.  None of these billboards even hint at the failure rate of condoms; in fact, the opposite is the case.  They all state plainly that, in order to be completely safe from HIV/AIDS, you must use condoms.

Conclusion:  Of Parachutes and Prophylactics.

     If parachutes had the abysmal safety record that condoms do, skydiving would have been outlawed long ago.  Add to this the fact that tens of thousands of people die of AIDS and other sexually-transmitted diseases for every person who dies in a parachuting accident, and it is obvious that we are suffering from a major case of worldwide myopia.  It is also obvious that most people would choose sudden death by parachute failure than a lingering, hideous wasting away at the `hands' of the AIDS virus.

     Condom promoters often make the following analogy.

     If your child was in an airplane that was going to crash, wouldn't you want him or her to have a parachute, even if it was only 90 percent effective?

     This is obviously a false analogy.

     If you, as a parent, already know that the airplane your children want to fly on is unsafe and will probably crash, your only realistic option is to stop him or her from boarding it in the first place!

     Good Housekeeping Magazine will not even accept condom advertisements, because they are not reliable enough for its "Seal of Approval."[60]

     Apparently, when it comes to birth control, anything goes.  What is apparently important is not whether or not you are safe, but whether or not you think you are safe.

     The Family Planners `Speak.' Perhaps family planners were at their most eloquent and revealing when they were not saying anything at all.  In 1987, 800 sexologists gathered for a conference in Heidelberg, Germany.  Dr. Theresa Crenshaw, past President of the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists (AASECT), asked the assembly how many of them would have intercourse with the HIV-infected partner of their dreams using a latex condom.  Not a single one raised their hand.  Dr. Crenshaw concluded that "Putting a mere balloon between a healthy body and a deadly disease is not safe."[61]

     The United States government pamphlet entitled "Condoms and Sexually Transmitted Diseases" says "Condoms are not 100 percent safe, but if used properly will reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS."

     Read this quote again.  What the United States government is telling us is that condoms reduce the risk of a disease that is 100 percent fatal!

     This has led to a phenomenon that one expert delicately terms a "disservice."  Susan Weller says that

A negative effect has been the misinterpretation and misinformation regarding condom effectiveness.  The public at-large may not understand the difference between `condoms may reduce risk of' and `condoms will prevent' HIV infection.  It is a disservice to encourage the belief that condoms will prevent sexual transmission of HIV.[62]

     There are hundreds of sources that claim that condoms reduce HIV transmission from 80 to 90 percent.  This is absolutely true -- but only if we compare (1) people using condoms to (2) people not using condoms at all.

     But this is a false choice.  The condom promoters simply assume that people are going to have extra-marital sex because they can't help themselves.  Such thinking is called "risk reduction," and is ultimately fatalistic.  It assumes that people are largely powerless to change their risky behaviors, and assumes that people who are generally acting irrationally (by engaging in high-risk sexual behavior) will suddenly begin acting rationally when handed a condom.

     The real decision is (1) to abstain or (2) to use condoms during extramarital sex.  Abstinence is obviously safer.

     The condom promoters are offering people a choice that is similar to this:  If a person is going to run into burning buildings just for thrills, it is much better for him to wear a fireproof suit than not to wear a fireproof suit.

     What we are saying is simply this:  It is far better not to run into that burning building at all.

Endnotes

[1]  Lee Warner, Ph.D., M.P.H., Robert A. Hatcher, M.D., M.P.H., and Markus J. Steiner, Ph.D.  "Male Condoms."  Chapter 16 in Robert A. Hatcher, M.D., M.P.H., et. al.  Contraceptive Technology (18th Revised Edition).  New York:  Ardent Media, Inc., 2004.

[2]  Ibid., page 334.

[3]  Richard Gordon.  "A Critical Review of the Physics and Statistics of Condoms and Their Role in Individual Versus Societal Survival of the AIDS Epidemic."  Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, Spring 1989 [Volume 15, number 1], pages 5 to 30.

[4]  M. Steiner, R. Flodesy, D. Cole and E. Carter.  Contraception 46, 279 [1992]; C.M. Roland.  "The Barrier Performance of Latex Rubber."  RubberWorld ["The Technical Service Magazine for the Rubber Industry"], June 1993 [Volume 208, Number 3].

[5]  William B. Vesey.  "Condom Failure."  Human Life International Reports, July 1991, pages 1 to 3.

[6]  Condom usage guides list anywhere from ten to sixteen steps involved in using condoms.  One article in the American Journal of Public Health says primly; "Condoms are not 100% efficacious and a high degree of individual compliance is required for condoms to be effective in use" [William L. Roper, M.D., M.P.H., Herbert B. Peterson, M.D., and James W. Curran, M.D., M.P.H.  "Commentary:  Condoms and HIV/STD Prevention -- Clarifying the Message."  American Journal of Public Health, April 1993 [Volume 83, Number 4], pages 501 to 503].

[7]  Helen Singer-Kaplan.  The Real Truth about Women and AIDS.  Simon & Schuster, 1987.

[8]  All of these studies are listed in Robert A. Hatcher, et. al. Contraceptive Technology (17th Revised Edition) [New York: Ardent Media, Inc., 1998].  Table 16-3, "Prospective Studies of Condom Breakage and Slippage," pages 330 to 332.  The Table refers to the following studies, as listed above.  All studies refer to vaginal intercourse only.

     (1)  Nevada -- Study of Nevada Brothel Prostitutes.  A.E. Albert, D.L. Warner, R.A Hatcher, J. Trussell, and C. Bennett.  "Condom Use Among Female Commercial Sex Workers in Nevada's Legal Brothels."  American Journal of Public Health, 1995;85:1,514-1,520.

     (2)  United States #1 -- Study of Monogamous American Couples.  M.J. Rosenberg and M.S Waugh. "Latex Condom Breakage and Slippage in a Controlled Clinical Trial."  Contraception, 1997;56:17.21 (events of breakage and slippage were unambiguously not double counted).

     (3)  United States #2 -- U.S. Clinical Research Participants.  M.A. Leeper and M. Conrardy.  "Preliminary Evaluation of REALITY, a Condom for Women to Wear."  Advances in Contraception 1989;5:229-235. 

     (4)  Sydney, Australia -- Study of Sydney Female Prostitutes.  J. Richters, B. Donovan, J. Gerofi and L. Watson.  "Low Condom Breakage Rate in Commercial Sex" [letter].  Lancet 1988;2:1,487-1,488.  Correction by John Gerofi in personal communication to Philip Kestelman, July 1989. 

     (5)  Atlanta, Georgia #1 -- Study of Atlanta Family Planning Recruits.  J. Trussel, D.L. Warner and R.A. Hatcher.  "Condom Performance During Vaginal Intercourse:  Comparison of Trojan-Enz and Tactylon Condoms." Contraception 1992;45:11-19.

     (6)  Atlanta, Georgia #2 -- Study of Atlanta Family Planning Recruits.  J. Trussel, D.L. Warner and R.A. Hatcher.  "Condom Slippage and Breakage Rates." Family Planning Perspectives 1992;24:20-23 (events of breakage and slippage were unambiguously not double counted; slippage rate recalculated from original article and reflects condoms that fell off or slipped down during intercourse or withdrawal).

     (7)  California #1 -- Study of Southern California Monogamous Couples.  A. Nelson, G.S. Bernstein, R. Frezieres, T. Walsh, V. Clark and A. Coulson.  "A Study of the Efficacy, Acceptability and Safety of a Non-Latex (Polyurethane) Male Condom; Revised Final Report (N01-HD-1-3109). Bethesda, Maryland:  National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, September 15, 1997 (events of breakage and slippage were unambiguously not double counted).

     (8)  California #2 -- Study of Southern California Monogamous Couples.  A. Nelson, R. Frezieres, T. Walsh, V. Clark and A. Coulson.  "A Controlled Randomized Evaluation of a Commercially Available Polyurethane and Latex Condom (Avanti Versus Ramses Sensitol):  Final Report (N01-HD-1-3109).  Bethesda, Maryland:  National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, November 6, 1996 (events of breakage and slippage were unambiguously not double counted). 

     (9)  North Carolina #1 -- Study of North Carolina Monogamous Couples (events of breakage and slippage were unambiguously not double counted; among new condoms used with either no additional lubricant or water-based lubricant, rates recalculated from the original article).

     (10) North Carolina #2 -- Study of North Carolina Monogamous Couples (breakage rates ranged from 3.5% for a new lot to 18.6% for an 81-month old lot).

     (11) North Carolina #3 -- Study of North Carolina Monogamous Couples (events of breakage and slippage were unambiguously not double counted).

     (12) North Carolina #4 -- Study of North Carolina Couples Recruited by Mail.

     (13) North Carolina #5 -- Study of North Carolina Local Recruits.

     (14) Denmark -- Study of Denmark Female Prostitutes and Male and Female Hospital Staff.

     (15) New Zealand -- Study of New Zealand Male and Female Family Planning Clinic Clients (events of breakage and slippage were unambiguously not double counted).

     In another major study, the nation's most trusted consumer's advocacy group, the Consumer's Union (CU), interviewed 3,300 of its readers in order to determine the effectiveness of condoms at preventing conception and disease.  CU also mechanically tested 16,000 condoms of 37 different varieties and brands.  It published the results of its studies in the March 1989 issue of Consumer Reports.  About one-fourth of the Consumer Union's readers reported at least one instance of condom breakage in a one-year period, and about one in eight experienced two or more incidents of breakage in one year.  Using these and other data, CU estimated that an average of one condom in 165 broke during heterosexual intercourse, and about one in 105 broke during anal intercourse.  This failure rate was much lower than that produced by most other studies.  The results of this study were not included in this Chapter because CU relied heavily on self-reporting, which is inherently unreliable ["Can You Rely on Condoms?"  Consumer Reports, March 1989, pages 135 to 141].

     Other studies do not reply on self-reporting, but rigorously document all procedures.  One such study found that 15.1% of 405 condoms broke or slipped off [James Trussell, David Lee Warner and Robert A. Hatcher.  "Condom Slippage and Breakage Rates."  Family Planning Perspectives [Alan Guttmacher Institute], January/February 1992 [Volume 24, Number 1], pages 20 to 23].

[9]  Lee Warner, Ph.D., M.P.H., Robert A. Hatcher, M.D., M.P.H., and Markus J. Steiner, Ph.D.  "Male Condoms."  Chapter 16 in Robert A. Hatcher, M.D., M.P.H., et. al.  Contraceptive Technology (18th Revised Edition).  New York:  Ardent Media, Inc., 2004.

[10] Accumulated condom failure rates can be calculated with the formula 1-(1-f)**n, where f equals the failure rate (0.14) and n equals the number of years.

[11] United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.  Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States 2006 (126th Edition) [Washington, D.C.:  United States Government Printing Office].  Table 92, "Contraceptive Use by Women, 15 to 44 Years of Age:  1995 and 2002."

[12] Judy Murty and Sue Firth of the Marie Stopes Centre.  "Use of Contraception By Women Seeking Termination of Pregnancy."  The British Journal of Family Planning, April 27, 1996, pages 6 to 9.

[13] Le Monde, May 28, 1996.

[14] M. Gabbay and A. Gibbs.  "Does Additional Lubrication Reduce Condom Failure?"  Contraception, March 1996, pages 155 to 158.

[15] "Condom Promotion for AIDS Prevention in the Developing World:  Is it Working?"  Studies in Family Planning, March 2004.

[16] "Condom Promotion for AIDS Prevention in the Developing World:  Is it Working?"  Studies in Family Planning, March 2004; UNAIDS, UNICEF and WHO.  "Epidemiological Fact Sheet on HIV/AIDS and STIs:  Cambodia."  2004 Update.

[17] Don Feder.  "CDC Opts to Wage Its Own Trojan War."  The Boston Herald, August 19, 1993; Kentucky Citizen's Digest, January/February 1993, pages 4 and 5.

[18] "Evaluation of Heterosexual Partners, Children and Household Contacts of Adults With AIDS."  Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), February 6, 1987.

[19] Jeffrey A. Kelly and Janet S. St. Lawrence.  "Cautions about Condoms in Prevention of AIDS."  The Lancet (Journal of the British Medical Association).  February 7, 1987, page 323.

[20] By comparision, neisseria gonorrhoeae (the largest STD infectious agent) is about 1,000 nanometers in diameter; a hepatitis B surface antigen (the smallest STD infectious agent) is about 22 nanometers in diamater, and the herpes virus is about 400 nanometers in diameter.  Marsha F. Goldsmith.  "Sex in the Age of AIDS Calls for Common Sense and `Condom Sense.'  JAMA, May 1, 1987, pages 2,261 to 2,263 and 2,266.

[21] Lauran Neergaard.  "CDC:  Condoms Can Block AIDS."  The Philadelphia Enquirer, August 6, 1993, page E10.

[22] C.M. Roland.  "The Barrier Performance of Latex Rubber."  RubberWorld ["The Technical Service Magazine for the Rubber Industry"], June 1993 [Volume 208, Number 3].

[23] C.M. Roland, Ph.D., Editor, Rubber Chemistry and Technology and Head of the Polymer Properties Section, Naval Research Laboratory.  Letter entitled "Do You Want to Stake Your Life on a Condom?"  Washington Times, April 22, 1992.

[24] G.B. Davis and L.W. Shroeder.  Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 18, 352 (1990); C.M. Roland.  "The Barrier Performance of Latex Rubber."  RubberWorld ["The Technical Service Magazine for the Rubber Industry"], June 1993 [Volume 208, Number 3].  Sometimes, condom advocates say that HIV is always attached to or associated with a cell.  This is not a factual allegation.  HIV is definitely present in free virus form, that is, it is not associated with or attached to sperm cells or white blood cells [J.H. Mermin, M. Holodniy, D.A. Katzenstein and T.C. Merigan.  "Detection of Human Immunodeficiency Virus DNA and RNA in Semen by the Polymerase Chain Reaction."  Journal of Infectious Diseases, October 1991, pages 769 to 772].

[25] R. Schmukler and R.B. Beard, unpublished study.  Described in C.M. Roland.  "The Barrier Performance of Latex Rubber."  RubberWorld ["The Technical Service Magazine for the Rubber Industry"], June 1993 [Volume 208, Number 3].

[26] "From the Surgeon General, US Public Health Service."  Journal of the American Medical Association, June 9, 1993, page 2,840.

[27] Ronald F. Carey, William A. Herman, Stephen M. Retta, Jean E. Rinaldi, Bruce A. Herman, and T. Whit Athey.  "Effectiveness of Latex Condoms As a Barrier to Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Sized Particles under Conditions of Simulated Use."  Sexually Transmitted Diseases, July-August 1992, pages 230 to 233.  The article stated that "Leakage of HIV-sized particles through latex condoms was detectable (P<0.03) for as many as 29 of the 89 condoms tested."  This study used fluorescence-labeled, 110-nanometer polystyrene microspheres to model free HIV particles.

[28] C.M. Roland, Ph.D., Editor, Rubber Chemistry and Technology and Head of the Polymer Properties Section, Naval Research Laboratory.  Letter entitled "Do You Want to Stake Your Life on a Condom?"  Washington Times, April 22, 1992.

[29] Quoted in John Kelly, M.D.  "Condom Failure and Transmission of HIV Infection."  CMAC Bulletin, October 1992, pages 19 and 19.

[30] Robert A. Hatcher, et. al.  Contraceptive Technology (17th Revised Edition).  New York:  Ardent Media, Inc., 1998.  See the Index to find discussions of the various sexually transmitted diseases.

[31] United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.  Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States 1999 (119th Edition) [Washington, D.C.:  United States Government Printing Office].  Table 226, "Specified Reportable Diseases - Cases Reported:  1980 to 1997."

[32] Ibid.

[33] Ibid.

[34] Lynda Richardson.  "Condoms in School Said Not to Affect Teen-Age Sex Rate."  The New York Times, September 30, 1997, pages A1 and A14.

[35] W.R. Grady, M.D. Hayward, and J. Yagi.  "Contraceptive Failure in the United States:  Estimates From the 1982 National Survey of Family Growth."  Alan Guttmacher Institute's Family Planning Perspectives, September/October 1986, page 204.

[36] Jana Mazanee.  "Birth Rate Soars At Colorado School."  USA Today, May 19, 1992, page 3A.

[37] Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS).  "Uganda:  Epidemiological Fact Sheet on HIV/AIDS and Sexually Transmitted Diseases," 2000.

[38] President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda.  What is Africa's Problem? [Minneapolis:  University of Minnesota Press], 2000.

[39] Tom Carter.  "Uganda Leads by Example on AIDS."  The Washington Times, March 13, 2003.

[40] Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS).  "AIDS Epidemic Update, December 2005." 

[41] Joseph Loconte.  "The White House Initiative to Combat AIDS:  Learning from Uganda."  The Heritage Foundation's Executive Summary Backgrounder #1692, September 29, 2003.  18 pages, PDF document.  http://www.heritage.org/research/africa/bg1692.cfm for the article.

[42] E.C. Green, V. Nantulya, R. Stoneburner, and J. Stover.  "What Happened in Uganda?  Declining HIV Prevalence, Behavior Change and the National Response."  United States Agency for International Development (USAID), September 2002.  To see this report, http://www.usaid.gov/pop_health/aids/Countries/africa/uganda_report.pdf.

[43] Ibid.

[44] Global HIV Prevention Working Group.  Mobilization for HIV Prevention:  A Blueprint for Action, July 2002. 

[45] Norman Hearst and Sanny Chen.  "Condom Promotion for AIDS Prevention in the Developing World:  Is It Working?"  Studies in Family Planning, March 2004.

[46] Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS).  Country-by-country HIV/AIDS statistics can be accessed http://www.unaids.org/en/Regions_Countries/Countries/default.asp.

[47] Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS).  "United States of America:  Epidemiological Fact Sheet on HIV/AIDS and Sexually Transmitted Diseases," 2004 Update.

[48] C. Hermann, E.C. Green, J. Chin, M. Taguiwalo, and C. Cortez.  "Evaluation of the Philippines AIDS Surveillance and Education Project."  USAID/Philippines, May 8, 2001.

[49] Poster by `Catholics' for a Free Choice (CFFC) entitled "Abstinence Has a High Failure Rate:  Good Catholics Use Condoms."  Downloaded from the Web site of CFFC at http://www.condoms4life.org/images/image2.htm.

[50] Some examples of this thinking from ages past;

• "Chastity cannot be a virtue because it is not a natural state" [Dr. Harry Benjamin, endocrinologist and Kinsey advocate, in the Introduction to pedophile Rene Guyon's book Sexual Ethics, 1948].
• "Our alternative solution is to be ready as educators and parents to help young people obtain sex satisfaction before marriage.  By sanctioning sex before marriage, we will prevent fear and guilt.  We must also relieve those who have them of their fears and guilt feelings, and we must be ready to provide young boys and girls with the best contraception measures available so they will have the necessary means to achieve sexual satisfaction without having to risk possible pregnancy.  We owe this to them" [Dr. Lena Levine.  "Psychosexual Development."  Planned Parenthood News, Summer 1953, page 10.
• "The adolescent years are, among other things, for learning how to integrate sex usefully and creatively into daily living.  Therefore, we must accept that adolescent sexual experimentation is not just inevitable, but actually necessary for normal development. ... The adolescent years are, among other things, for learning how to integrate sex usefully and creatively into daily living.  Sexual experimentation is a moral and appropriate decision for adolescents ... I advocate discussion of it [sex], so young people know they have choices beginning with masturbation, of course, and petting to climax and mutual orgasm before moving on to intercourse. ... An extramarital affair that's really solid might have a very good result" [Mary Steichen Calderone, M.D., founder of the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) and its President from 1964 to 1982, Medical Director of Planned Parenthood/World Population (PP/WP) from 1982 to 1993, and President of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR).  Quoted in "Woman Favors Sex Testing by Adolescents."  Minneapolis Tribune, October 13, 1965, and "An Interview With Mary Calderone."  Playboy Magazine, April 1970].
• "No religious views, no moral standards, are to deflect the child from the overriding purposes of self-discovery, self-assertion, and self-gratification" [Planned Parenthood Sex Education and Mental Health Report, 1979].
• "FIRST PRIZE:  A Solid Gold Condom:  "From using a condom you will learn/No deposit means no return."  SECOND PRIZE:  A Bronzed Wallet with Circular [Condom] Indentation:  "Rubberizing copulation/Puts a cap on population."  THIRD PRIZE:  A Gross of Condoms (144) for the Night of Your Life:  "When you rise ... Condomize."  FINALISTS.  "Twins are bad, triplets worse/Use a condom, safety first!"  "Rubbers are jolly, rubbers are fun/Better to use one than end up a mum"" [Winners of the Population Institute's "Condom Couplet Contest," announced on "Condom Day," February 20, 1978.  Described in the National Alliance for Optional Parenthood's "Searching for Alternatives to Teenage Pregnancy," 1980].
• "We are not going to be an organization promoting celibacy or chastity" [Faye Wattleton, former President of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), quoted in the Los Angeles Times, October 17, 1986, page V-1.
• "God knew when he made us that he has given us a built-in sex drive to go out and sow our seeds.  He has given us promiscuous genes.  I think it would be wrong for the church to condemn people who have followed their instincts" [Richard Holloway, the Anglican Bishop of Edinburgh, quoted in "The Edge:  The Quotebag," The Oregonian, June 26, 1995, page C1.
• "The big lie is that it's easy to be monogamous, and that everybody is.  If you believe that, you'd better choose well.  We can't go back to the values we had because they don't exist anymore.  For the most part, women are not virgins anymore, so to teach virginity doesn't work" [Carol Cassell, former Director of Education for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and Past President of the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists (AASECT).  Family Life Educator, Fall 1987, page 19, also quoted in Focus on the Family Citizen, December 1989].

[51] Allan Parachini.  "Condom Industry Seeking Limits on U.S. Study."  Los Angeles Times, August 28, 1987.  The article also states that "Among other things, the association [the Health Industry Manufacturers Association, which is the condom industry's trade group] has insisted to federal funding officials that the research rely solely on testing standards established by condom makers, that condom companies be allowed to supply all prophylactics to be tested, and that only products currently sold in the United States be studied ... The documents indicate that the attempt to force major modifications in the condom study was apparently motivated by industry concerns that the research might conclude that no American-made condom is currently able to consistently prevent the spread of HIV."

[52] Lothrop Stoddard, Ph.D.  The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy.  New York:  Charles Scribner's Sons, 1921.  Reprinted in 1971 by Negro Universities Press, Westport, Connecticut.  Pages i, 8, 9, 90, 231, 298, 301, 302, 308, and 309 in the reprinted version.

[53] "Abstinence, Condom Controversy Erupts at AIDS Meet."  Reuters, July 12, 2004.

[54] D. Kristof.  "The Secret War on Condoms," available http://www.condoms4life.org/images/image2.htm

[55] "Abstinence Row Overshadows AIDS Day."  Daily Dispatch (South Africa), November 30, 2004.

[56] "World AIDS Day:  Condom Restrictions Cost Lives."  Human Rights Watch.

[57] "Ugandan Anti-AIDS Activist Demands UN Fire Lewis For Pushing Condoms."  LifeSite Daily News at http://www.lifesite.net/, September 7, 2005.

[58] "Mandela, Clinton Close Barcelona Conference, Urging More Action."  UNWire, July 12, 2002, available http://www.unwire.org/unwire/20020712/27624_story.asp.

[59] Edward C. Green, quoted in The Boston Globe and in "United Nations Report Says Condoms Fail to Protect Against AIDS 10% of the Time."  http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/jun/030623.html LifeSite Daily News, June 23, 2003.

[60] Letter entitled "Sound Medical Advice," by William V. Fitzsimmons, M.D.  Fidelity Magazine, April 1987, pages 11 and 12.

[61] Don Feder.  "CDC Opts to Wage Its Own Trojan War."  The Boston Herald, August 19, 1993; Kentucky Citizen's Digest, January/February 1993, pages 4 and 5.

[62] Susan Weller, associate professor of Preventive Medicine and Community Health at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galvestion, quoted in Jo Ann Zuniga.  "Study:  Condoms Don't Eliminate Spread of HIV."  The San Juan Star, June 18, 1993.l

Recommended Reading on Condoms.

(1)  [In]effectiveness of Condoms.

• Joel Mclhaney, M.D., Medical Institute for Sexual Health [MISH].  "Condom Effectiveness."  This is probably the best summary of studies on the ineffectiveness of the latex condom that exists on the Internet today. 
• American Life League (ALL).  "The Flawed Condom."  2002, 4 pages.  An excellent and short summary of the critical issues surrounding condom use -- failure rates, permeability, and efforts to coverup the high failure rate of the condom. 
• The Culture of Life Foundation & Institute.  "Condom Effectiveness Summary."  A very good overview of the issues surrounding the ineffectiveness of condoms.  http://www.altheal.org/overview/condoms.htm for the article.
• Medical Institute for Sexual Health [MISH].  "Frequently Asked Questions."  A superb summary of all of the issues surrounding the STDs epidemics, including the impact of teen sexual activity, the ineffectiveness of condoms, and the types and frequencies of STDs.  http://www.medinstitute.org/health/questions_answers.html#listitem1766%11%207467 for the questions.
• Jane Jiminez.  "All the Condoms in the World."  Agape Press, February 16, 2004.  A thoughtful essay on the only realistic method to stop the AIDS epidemic -- chastity!  http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/2/162005jj.asp for the article.
• Jane Jiminez.  "Condoms:  Context Counts."  Agape Press, January 11, 2005.  When considering how "effective" condoms are, remember that tests are carried out in sterile and perfect laboratory conditions, not in messy, uncontrolled, disease-saturated real-life conditions.  In other words, the actual failure rate of condoms is much higher than they tell you.  http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/1/112005jj.asp for the article.

(2)  Catholic Church Teachings on Condoms.

• Alfonso Cardinal Lopez Trujillo, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family.  "Family Values Versus Safe Sex."  December 1, 2003.  This is the best and most complete summary of the Church's teachings on all issues surrounding the condom debate, to include condom failure, the morality of AIDS sufferers using condoms, the right to truly complete information on condoms, and the need to rediscover responsible sexual behavior.  http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_20031201_family%11%20values%11%20safe%11%20sex%11%20trujillo_en.html for the essay.
• Monsignor Jacques Suaudeau, M.D.  "Stopping the Spread of HIV/AIDS."  A wonderful essay that addresses the Church's caring for AIDS patients from the very beginning of the epidemic, the fact that the family alone, if properly configured, prevents STDs, and that condoms will add to the problem, not detract from it.  
• Michael Cook.  "Was Karol Wojtyla the Greatest Mass Murderer of the 20th Century?"  Tech Central Station, June 10, 2005.  A wonderful summary of the ridiculous charges made against Pope John Paul II because he would not condone the use of condoms, and a coherent and succinct reply to these charges.  Especially riveting is the proven fact that AIDS incidence is inversely proportional to the number of Catholics in African countries.  http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx-id=061005D for the article.
• "What Does the Church Teach About Birth Control?"  Couple to Couple League International (CCLI), 1981.  This is a concise and complete summary of the teachings of the Catholic Church about all methods of birth control, both contraceptive and abortifacient.  http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARRIAGE/CCLBC.TXT for the article.
• "Vatican Message for the World Day Against AIDS."  December 1, 2005.  A concise summary of Catholic teachings about AIDS.  http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/hlthwork/documents/rc_pc_hlthwork_doc_20051201_giornata%11%20aids_en.html for the message.
• Amin Abboud.  "Letter:  Searching for Papal Scapegoats is Pointless."  British Medical Journal, July 30, 2005, page 294.  A doctor mounts a strong defense of the teachings of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XIV.  http://www.bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/extract/331/7511/294" for the article.
• Hilary White.  "South African Bishop Calls for Catholic "Theology" of Condoms for AIDS."  LifeSite Daily News, November 15, 2005.  Renegade bishop Kevin Dowling of the Rustenberg Diocese condemns Catholic teaching on the sanctity of marriage and sexual self-control as "death-dealing," but, like all other condom pushers, his statements are wildly inconsistent and illogical.  http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/nov/05111507.html for the article.
• "Condom Conundrums:  Evidence Shows Wisdom of Catholic Doctrine."  ZENIT News Service, September 24, 2005.  3 pages, PDF document.  This is an excellent summary of the issues surrounding condom distribution in Uganda, including the fact that men given condoms immediately began to have more sexual partners.  http://www.zenit.org/ for the article.
• "Doubts About Condoms:  Science Questioning Their Efficacy in Halting HIV/AIDS."  Zenit News Service, June 26, 2004.  Medical journals show the wisdom of Catholic teaching regarding condoms, abstinence and AIDS.  http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml-sid=55945 for the article.

(3)  Africa and AIDS.

• Joseph Loconte.  "The White House Initiative to Combat AIDS:  Learning from Uganda."  The Heritage Foundation's Executive Summary Backgrounder #1692, September 29, 2003.  18 pages, PDF document.  This is the most complete description of all of the details of Uganda's ABC program, and is a must-read for all who are concerned about the African AIDS epidemic.  http://www.heritage.org/research/africa/bg1692.cfm for the article.
• Douglas Sylva.  "Sacrificing Humans to the Condom Gods."  TheFactIs.org, 2005.  An excellent summary of myths generated by population controllers and condom pushers in Uganda.  These include the myth that condoms were responsible for the Ugandan success in reducing AIDS, that religion has no place in this situation, and that women must be freed from marriage even more than they must be freed from prostitition. 
• Erin Curry.  "USAID Accused of Human Rights Abuse for Burying Harvard Prof's Abstinence Research."  Baptist Press at http://www.bpnews.net/, February 15, 2005.  Liberal secularist and Harvard professor Edward Green wrote a report for USAID showing that condoms are ineffective at stopping the spread of AIDS in Africa.  So USAID suppressed the results of Green's study, and, in fact, hired a well-known condom advocate to redo the study in order to arrive at the results the organization wanted — i.e., that condoms are necessary to stop AIDS.  http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/bpnews.asp-ID=20146 for the article.
• Testimony of Edward C. Green, PhD, Senior Research Scientist, Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Before the African Subcommittee of the United States Senate, May 19, 2003.  http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hcpds/documents/Senate%20Testimony%20rev2.pdf for Dr. Green's testimony.
• Michael Carter.  "Uganda's Success Against HIV Due to Abstinence, Behaviour Change and Community, not Condoms."  AIDSMap News, April 30, 2004.  http://www.aidsmap.com/en/news/ED007047%11%200E93%11%204964%11%209FBA%11%20AA887D42817E.asp for the article.
• Chuck Colson.  "Much-Needed Honesty:  Africa and AIDS."  BreakPoint, July 7, 2005.  An essay on human nature, condoms and AIDS in Mozambique. 
• Michael Cook.  ""This Should Have Been Anthropology 101:"  Quiet Breakthroughs in Africa's War on AIDS."  Tech Central Station.  December 27, 2004.  This is a superb summary of the Ugandan ABC program and its history.  Highly recommended.  http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx-id=122704X for the article.
• Steve Jordahl.  "Ugandan Abstinence Too Successful, Say Some."  Family News in Focus [Focus on the Family]. August 2, 2005.  Pro-condom activists make the idiotic allegation that abstinence in Uganda is so successful that there will soon be a population crash. 
• "Ugandan Anti-AIDS Activist Demands UN Fire Lewis For Pushing Condoms."  LifeSite Daily News at http://www.lifesite.ne/, September 7, 2005.  http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/sep/050907.html for the article.
• Kerry L. Marsala.  "Pass the Condoms and Let's Forget Ideology."  July 19, 2004.  Despite the name of the article, it is a superb defense of President Museveni of Uganda and the Bush Administration's emphasis on AIDS prevention by abstinence and faithfulness.  http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0704/0704condoms.htm for the article.
• Candi Cushman.  "A Republican Sex Scandal."  Citizen Magazine [Focus on the Family], January 2006.  How Republican senators and pro-abortion groups are attempting to undermine President Bush's abstinence-based anti-AIDS programs, in Uganda and elsewhere. 
• Address by Her Excellency Janet K. Museveni, First Lady of the Republic of Uganda.  "Common Ground:  A Shared Vision for Health."  Conference hosted by The Medical Institute for Sexual Health [MISH], Washington, DC, June 17- 19, 2004.  http://www.medinstitute.org/includes/downloads/museveni.pdf%20for%20the%20address.
• Mary Rettig.  "AIDS Researcher:  European and U.N. Anti-Abstinence Bias Will Cost Lives."  Agape Press, December 13, 2005.  http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/12/132005a.asp for the article.
• "UN Program Rejects Abstinence Group for Criticizing Condoms."  Friday FAX (Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM)), September 1, 2005 [Volume 8, Number 37].  Nigeria's Action Family Foundation was denied admittance to a United Nations volunteer program.  One of the criteria for admittance is that organizations must not be critical of any aspect of the ABC program.  But, of course, the U.N. readily admits to the program groups that are highly critical of abstinence. 

(4)  Population Control and Condoms.

• Joseph A. D'Agostino.  "UNAIDS and UNFPA Want More of the Same for Asia."  Population Research Institute's Weekly Briefing, July 28, 2005 [Volume 7, Number 29].  Population control groups, instead of spreading effective programs from Uganda and the Philippines, want to impose ineffective programs of sex education and condoms on these nations.  http://www.pop.org/main.cfm-id=243&r1=2.00&r2=1.50&r3=0.04&r4=0.00&level=3&eid=841 for the article.
• "United Nations's Cartoon Condoms:  Global Body Unveils Shaft, Stretch and Dick in TV Ads Pushing AIDS Prevention Message."  WorldNetDaily, January 13, 2005.  In its relentless push of programs that have proven to be ineffective, the United Nations puts together twenty obscene public service announcements featuring three animated condoms.  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp-ARTICLE_ID=42353 for the article.
• James K. Glassman.  "The Phony Abstinence Complaint."  Tech Central Station.  August 20, 2004.  Celebrities at the July 2004 Bangkok conference on AIDS condemn the United States for not pushing condoms more.  http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx-id=082004G%20for the article.