You talk such nonsense.
Anyone who suffers from Type I, II or IV latex allergies will react to
latex no matter what shape it is formed into.
The body sees no difference between latex in the shape of a glove and
latex in the shape of a condom.
The nursing site does not make much of condoms as nurses tend not to wear
condoms at work.
To claim a condom is different from a glove in any way EXCEPT for shape is
utter nonsense.
>You talk such nonsense.
How kind! How charming! How instructive!
>Anyone who suffers from Type I, II or IV latex allergies will react to
>latex no matter what shape it is formed into.
Possibly so. How common are such allergies? How are they likely to
develop?
>The body sees no difference between latex in the shape of a glove and
>latex in the shape of a condom.
Once an allergy is established. But how does the allergy develop?
Among whom is it most likely to develop?
>The nursing site does not make much of condoms as nurses tend not to wear
>condoms at work.
Or perhaps because use of condoms during sexual activity is less
routine and persistent than use of latex gloves by nurses?
>To claim a condom is different from a glove in any way EXCEPT for shape is
>utter nonsense.
A condom is different from a glove in that it is used to prevent
pregnancy while a glove is not. It is used to prevent HIV infection
and other STDs. So there's a couple of ways a condom is different from
a glove.
George M. Carter