Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's official -- it's best to get cut, boys

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Asher
    If HIV can't get in through a properly used condom, I'm sure you can connect the dots.
    Your a priori "connect the dots" assertions don't have the best record.

    Comment


    • I refuse to state the obvious for an American in denial.

      FACT: HIV cannot penetrate a properly used condom.
      THUS: If HIV cannot get to the penis, the circumcised state of the penis is not a factor.
      "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
      Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

      Comment


      • Kuci, yeah, but also making this a big deal will result into attitude problems, as in 'this is significant', and therefore the use of condom rides in the backseat.

        This is undermining the condom, which works against HIV. Cut penis doesn't, and neither does uncut for that matter.
        In da butt.
        "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
        THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
        "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

        Comment


        • Asher, it's a myth that has been layed over the nation for decades. It doesn't just go away in a second..
          In da butt.
          "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
          THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
          "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

          Comment


          • FACT: Condoms aren't 100% effective in preventing pregnancy.

            QUESTION: Why would anyone assume them to be 100% effective against HIV?


            CONCLUSIONS:

            A) If a condom can cut any percentage of HIV transmittal, a man is a fool to not use.

            B) Why can't there be an option on the cutting?
            Kind of top down, top up ala a convertible car?
            Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
            "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
            He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

            Comment


            • Originally posted by SlowwHand
              FACT: Condoms aren't 100% effective in preventing pregnancy.

              QUESTION: Why would anyone assume them to be 100% effective against HIV?
              When used properly you can't get pregnant with the condom. Pregnancies occur with improper use or breakages (or even a tear).

              There's always the chance of getting pregnant or HIV when using condoms because there is always the slight chance that they will break or otherwise screw up. The only 100% prevention is abstinence.

              But when you're talking about the effects of circumcisions preventing HIV when using a condom, the figures are absolutely remote. And considering the state of health care in Africa, the risk of complications from the operation is no doubt much higher.

              CONCLUSIONS:

              A) If a condom can cut any percentage of HIV transmittal, a man is a fool to not use.
              Of course. Condoms are the best answer.

              B) Why can't there be an option on the cutting?
              Option being the key, sure. I don't think it should be banned, I just think the person getting it done should get the option.

              I think being told by his government to get it done is evil. I think the parents doing it to the kid is, likewise, evil.
              "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
              Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Pekka
                Kuci, yeah, but also making this a big deal will result into attitude problems, as in 'this is significant', and therefore the use of condom rides in the backseat.

                This is undermining the condom, which works against HIV. Cut penis doesn't, and neither does uncut for that matter.
                The condom undermines abstinence, which works 100% against HIV. So?

                Comment


                • Abstinence is not a practical solution because of biological imperatives.

                  Condoms are practical. More practical than invasive surgery, as it is...
                  "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                  Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                  Comment


                  • The evidence doesn't really seem to indicate that.

                    Comment


                    • The evidence doesn't show condoms are more practical?
                      "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                      Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                      Comment


                      • Given that we know condoms haven't shown great success (in uptake) and given what lotm posted about Africen men being more willing to get circumcised, yes.

                        Comment


                        • Why on earth would you be more willing to get circumcised than to wear a condom? I understand that apparently they are, and I'm not outraged by it like Asher (BTW, good one about Sony and Apple, LOTM), but I'm curious why. Undocumented latex allergies, or some demented pop pseudoscience scaring them off, or what?
                          1011 1100
                          Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Asher

                            This does not dispute in any way what I have said. It's just worded differently -- nothing can provide absolute protection. Condoms can break or otherwise not be used correctly.
                            Breakage or slippage do not necessarily result from improper use.


                            Laboratory studies have demonstrated that latex condoms provide an essentially
                            impermeable barrier to particles the size of STD pathogens.


                            Thus, a correctly used condom is not something effective in the "85% range" as you've thrown around.
                            Practicality has to be taken into consideration. Some people are rougher than others, some people have unusual sized penises. My problem with them is that I simply produce semen than most. I fill the reservoir and still have flow along the shaft. I've been looking for the "Three Gorges" reservoir size but I haven't found it anywhere.
                            [Condoms, when used correctly, are BY FAR the most effective protection against HIV. By design, STD pathogens cannot penetrate a condom used correctly. That's fact, and I'm sorry if it irks you.
                            Yet strangely researchers interested in birth control found it necessary to contrive a vast array of alternatives to the condom, though obviously sperm are much larger than viruses and therefore surely the condom must be as perfect at contraception as it is for infection prevention. What kind of idiot was Margaret Sanger anyway? Who produced the vast quantity of research data showing the deficiencies of the condom as a birth control method. Yeah, I'm willing to bet it was the religious right.
                            There is the issue of not using a condom correctly, but that is another issue entirely and covered under the "education" bit.
                            I might add that the studies comparing the effectiveness of birth control methods in the late 60s also attempted to address the education issue. Increasing the number of sessions of education on condom use improved effectiveness only slightly.
                            Circumcision simply plays ZERO role. It plays NO ROLE in preventing the spread of HIV if a condom is used. That negates the whole purpose of using circumcision as a tool to combat HIV unless you are practicing unsafe sex.

                            So the problem here should be obvious.
                            Yes, the problem is that you're just way ahead of the world's leading minds in public health.
                            Have you ever tried to put a condom back on when your girl wants a second sample? If you're as juicy as me it's pretty much impossible. I mean the pole is slick as a greased pig.
                            "I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!

                            Comment


                            • I've frequently used condoms multiple times in the same night with no problems. PEBKAC.
                              "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                              Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                              Comment


                              • You use condoms for that?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X