You know that if condoms were not effective people would not have been
using them for 3000 years.
http://www.avert.org/condoms.htm
The condom history
1000 BC
Condom use can be traced back several thousand years. It is known that
around 1000 BC the ancient Egyptians used a linen sheath for
protection against disease.
100 - 200 AD
The earliest evidence of condom use in Europe comes from scenes in
cave paintings at Combarelles in France. There is also some evidence
that some form of condom was used in imperial Rome.
1500's
The syphilis epidemic that spread across Europe gave rise to the first
published account of the condom. Gabrielle Fallopius described a
sheath of linen he claimed to have invented to protect men against
syphilis.4 Having been found useful for prevention of infection, it
was only later that the usefulness of the condom for the prevention of
pregnancy was recognised.
Later in the 1500s, one of the first improvements to the condom was
made, when the linen cloth sheaths were sometimes soaked in a chemical
solution and then allowed to dry prior to use. These were the first
spermicides on condoms.
1700's
The first published use of the world 'condum' was in a 1706 poem.6 It
has also been suggested that Condom was a doctor in the time of
Charles II. It is believed that he invented the device to help the
king to prevent the birth of more illegitimate children.
Even the most famous lover of all, Casanova, was using the condom as a
birth control as well as against infection.
Condoms made out of animal intestines began to be available. However,
they were quite expensive and the unfortunate result was that they
were often reused. This type of condom was described at the time as
"an armour against pleasure, and a cobweb against infection".
In the second half of the 1700's, a trade in handmade condoms thrived
in London and some shops where producing handbills and advertisements
of condoms.
1800's
The use of condoms was affected by technological, economic and social
development in Europe and the US in 1800s.
Condom manufacturing was revolutionised by the discovery of rubber
vulcanisation by Goodyear (founder of the tyre company) and Hancock.
This meant that is was possible to mass produce rubber goods including
condoms quickly and cheaply. Vulcanisation is a process, which turns
the rubber into a strong elastic material.
In 1861,the first advertisement for condoms was published in an
American newspaper when The New York Times printed an ad. for 'Dr.
Power's French Preventatives.'
In 1873, the Comstock Law was passed. Named after Anthony Comstock,
the Comstock Law made illegal the advertising of any sort of birth
control, and it also allowed the postal service to confiscate condoms
sold through the mail.
1900's
Until the 1920's, most condoms were manufactured by hand-dipping from
rubber cement. These kinds of condoms aged quickly and the quality was
doubtful.
In 1919, Frederick Killian initiated hand-dipping from natural rubber
latex in Ohio. The latex condoms had the advantage of ageing less
quickly and being thinner and odourless. These new type of condoms
enjoyed a great expansion of sales. By the mid-1930s, the fifteen
largest makers in the U.S. were producing 1.5 million condoms a day.
In 1957, the very first lubricated condom was launched in the UK by
Durex.
From the early 1960s, use of condoms as a contraceptive device
declined as the pill, the coil and sterilisation became more popular.
The use of the condom increased strikingly in many countries following
the recognition of HIV/AIDS in the 1980's. Condoms also became
available in pubs, bars, grocery stores and supermarkets.
The female condom has been available in Europe since 1992 and it was
approved in 1993 by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). More
information about female condom can be found here.
In 1994, the world's first polyurethane condom for men was launched in
the US.
The 1990s also saw the introduction of coloured and flavoured condoms.
Present day
In more recent years, improved technology has enabled the thickness of
the condom to decrease. Also, condom manufacturers have recognised
that one size of condom does not fit all. You can now find condoms
that are different shapes, widths and lengths.
Are condoms effective? Do condoms fail?
Are condoms effective at preventing infection with the HIV and
sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)?
Yes. Studies have shown that if a latex condom is used correctly every
time you have sex, this is highly effective in providing protection
against HIV.
The evidence for this is clearest in studies of couples in which one
person is infected with HIV and the other not. i.e. "discordant
couples". In a study of discordant couples in Europe, among 123
couples who reported consistent condom use, none of the uninfected
partners became infected. In contrast, among the 122 couples who used
condoms inconsistently, 12 of the uninfected partners became infected.
In addition, correct and consistent use of latex condoms can reduce
the risk of other STDs.
As these studies indicate, condoms must be used consistently and
correctly to provide maximum protection. Consistent use means using a
condom from start to finish with each act of intercourse. Correct
condom use should include:
* Use a new condom for each act of intercourse
* Put on the condom as soon as erection occurs and before any sexual
contact (vaginal, anal or oral).
* Hold the tip of the condom and unroll it onto the erect penis,
leaving space at the tip of the condom, yet ensuring that no air is
trapped in the condom's tip.
* Adequate lubrication is important, but use only water-based
lubricants on latex condoms. Oil-based lubricants such as petroleum
jelly (vaseline), cold cream, hand lotion or baby oil can weaken the
latex condom and are not recommended. However, oil-based lubricants
can be used with condoms made of polyurethane.
* Withdraw from the partner immediately after ejaculation, holding the
condom firmly to keep it from slipping off.
More information about using condoms can be found here.
Brian Mailman - 03 Sep 2004 17:42 GMT
> In 1861,the first advertisement for condoms was published in an
> American newspaper when The New York Times printed an ad. for 'Dr.
> Power's French Preventatives.'
I believe Dumas in The Three Musketeers had Buckhingham refer to them as
"French letters."
B/
PaulKing - 03 Sep 2004 23:54 GMT
Ten year old piece of CDC propaganda: -
"The evidence for this is clearest in studies of couples in which one
person is infected with HIV and the other not. i.e. "discordant couples".
In a study of discordant couples in Europe, among 123 couples who reported
consistent condom use, none of the uninfected
partners became infected. In contrast, among the 122 couples who used
condoms inconsistently, 12 of the uninfected partners became infected."
This very, very old piece of CDC misinformation (hardly a study) IS THE
ONLY THING ANYONE CAN EVER DIG UP TO SUPPORT CONDOM USE. The conclusion
section of this short paper admits that "in real world use condoms fail
28% to 35% of the time".
More interesting is that a huge study (10 years) had the same result
EXCEPT THE COUPLE DID NOT USE CONDOMS: -
STUDY EXPOSES MYTH OF SEXUAL TRANSMISSION
The 10-year Padian study observed sexually active
couples in which one partner was HIV positive. The result: in 10 years,
not one uninfected partner contracted HIV, even though all participants
admitted to having sex without condoms. The study states, 'We followed up
175 HIV-discordant couples over time, for a total of approximately 282
couple-years of follow up. The longest duration of follow-up was 12 visits
(6 years).
We observed no seroconversion [infection] after entry into the
study." In the three-year Stewart study (1985) not one male partner of
HIV-positive women contracted HIV. Prostitution is not even listed as an
HIV risk category by the CDC, because of the extremely low incidence of
HIV transmission to clients who have no other risk factors (i.e. drug
abuse).
These findings bolster the hypothesis of some AIDS scientists that chronic
malnutrition and other environmental factors, and not a
sexually-transmitted virus, are the causes of weakened immunity in people
diagnosed with one of the nearly 30 AIDS-defining diseases (which vary
from country to country).
Gary Stein - 04 Sep 2004 01:01 GMT
> More interesting is that a huge study (10 years) had the same result
> EXCEPT THE COUPLE DID NOT USE CONDOMS: -
Care to give a reference to the study you mention above????????
Gary Stein
David Canzi -- non-mailable address - 04 Sep 2004 03:29 GMT
>STUDY EXPOSES MYTH OF SEXUAL TRANSMISSION
>The 10-year Padian study observed sexually active
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>We observed no seroconversion [infection] after entry into the
>study."
Heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
in northern California: results from a ten-year study.
Padian NS, Shiboski SC, Glass SO, Vittinghoff E.
"A total of 82 infected women and their male partners and 360 infected
men and their female partners were enrolled. ... Overall, 68 (19%)
of the 360 female partners of HIV-infected men (95% confidence interval
(CI) 15.0-23.3%) and two (2.4%) of the 82 male partners of HIV-infected
women (95% CI 0.3-8.5%) were infected. ... Over time, the authors
observed increased condom use (p < 0.001) and no new infections."
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9
270414&dopt=Abstract>
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=cf9210%245h7%241%40rumours.uwaterloo.ca&out
put=gplain>
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=cgba31%24s37%241%40rumours.uwaterloo.ca&out
put=gplain>

Signature
David Canzi "Nonconformists travel as a rule in bunches. You rarely find
a nonconformist who goes it alone. And woe to him inside a
nonconformist clique who does not conform with nonconformity."
-- Eric Hoffer
http://www.HIVsearch.com - 04 Sep 2004 08:41 GMT
Very convincing, that google group link for the roumors links has got
to be real, oh and the original post coming from Paul King (not even
his real name), that has to make it even more believable!
LOL! ROTFL! LMAO! I love these daily funnies & "soap operas", "These
Are The Dissidents Of Our Lives"....
http://aids-dissidents.blogspot.com/2004/08/thank-paul-king-for-this-blog.html