Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / January 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

1995 - 2005. Condoms still made the same way.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
PaulKing - 06 Jan 2005 01:33 GMT
Carcinogens by the ton.
Same talc coating.
Same N-Nitrosamine.
Same Benzene.
Same Thiaozles
Same Morpholinyl mercaptobenzothiazol. N-Cyclohexyl benzothiazyl
sulphonamide and dibenzothiazyl disulphide.
Same Ortho-toluidine
Same Hexamethyline-tetramine
Same Silicone.

SAME RESULT - CANCER, FATAL TYPE IV ALLERGIC REACTIONS, SAME BIRTH
DEFECTS.

SAME BAD NEWS!!

Nothing has changed except the death which keep going up.
GMCarter - 06 Jan 2005 11:57 GMT
>Carcinogens by the ton.
>Same talc coating.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>Same Hexamethyline-tetramine
>Same Silicone.

First, that is your wholly unsupported claim that there have been no
changes. (Corn starch is used by many to replace talc. Not all.)

Second, the relevance of these constituents in terms of condoms is
negligible--most are found in higher quantities and concentrations in
common products like latex gloves.

>SAME RESULT - CANCER, FATAL TYPE IV ALLERGIC REACTIONS, SAME BIRTH
>DEFECTS.
>
>SAME BAD NEWS!!

LOL. Bullshit. The data have been presented and show that the risks of
any of those consequences is VERY low from using condoms. Versus the
risks of NOT using the condoms, including unwanted pregnancies and
sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV.

You're just trying to justify f.cking without a condom.

And then the cognitive dissonance. You embrace incredibly weak
evidence to support this bullshit while HIV, which has evidence from
tons of disciplines, many people's personal experience and even half
the denialist recognizes it exists---you'll ignore all that so you can
poke your little willy somewhere without a condom. Wow.

You're in need of serious help, Paul King.

        George M. Carter
PaulKing - 07 Jan 2005 00:20 GMT
"most are found in higher quantities and concentrations in common products
like latex gloves."

Actually the same concentrations. Latex gloves have been banned in
hospitals and have caused many deaths according to the FDA.

Unlike gloves, condoms are used internally in moist areas and are subject
to high frictional forces (rubbing) resulting from sex.

Nothing has changed in condom manufacture. The NLR trade association
clearly states that - reference posted before.

Want it again?

______

Why can you not accept the truth? Why are you so obsessed with hiding the
deadly facts about condoms?

It is insane!
GMCarter - 07 Jan 2005 01:28 GMT
>"most are found in higher quantities and concentrations in common products
>like latex gloves."
>
>Actually the same concentrations.

Sure. And a latex glove is the same size as a condom. And is worn for
the same length of time. And therefore all the risks are the same.
Same! Phrases like "all else being equal" take on a whole new meaning
in the impeccable world of Paul's lilting logic....
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.