Pro-Life: Sex, lies and latex: Study busts condom myth
by Jean-Marie Guenois
So much for "safe sex." A French priest and former
surgeon working for the Vatican Pontifical Council for
the Family recently published a study that claims that
the use of condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS is essentially
a game of Russian roulette.
Father Jacques Suaudeau's 37-page report, Safe Sex and
the Condom: Faced with the Challenge of AIDS, has stirred
controversy since its appearance in Medicina e Morale, an
Italian journal published by the Catholic University of the
Sacred Heart in Rome.
Father Suaudeau, who worked as a surgeon in France and
medical researcher in the United States before ordination,
based his conclusions on some 136 different studies concerning
condoms, HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted
diseases. "The epidemiological studies show that the condom
certainly gives protection against contamination by the virus,
but that this protection is far from absolute," he wrote.
"The possibility of contracting HIV using a condom during
high-risk sexual relations stands at an average of 15-16
percent."
Father Suaudeau said the risk rises to 20-30 percent when the
act is homosexual, when sexual promiscuity is high and when
another sexually transmitted disease is involved.
Science only
It didn't take long for the pro-condom community to react
negatively to Father Suaudeau's study.
If he were an agnostic "free thinker", perhaps his study would
not have attracted so much attention. But his position at the
Vatican adds a certain weight to his findings.
Nevertheless, Father Suaudeau's report steers clear of any
ethical considerations, never raising the contested question of
whether or not the use of condoms is moral.
Instead, his study focuses on something much simpler:
whether or not condoms are any good at preventing disease.
The Church, of course, opposes the use of condoms, along
with other artificial birth control.
But as to whether it is permissible for condoms to be encouraged in the context of "safe-sex" campaigns
involving populations (such as homosexuals and intravenous drug users) that already disregard Church teaching, the French bishops have suggested that the question is open and "nuanced".
They and some Vatican theologians have
suggested that condoms could be considered a
lesser evil to be permitted in preventing a
greater evil: the spread of AIDS.
Father Suaudeau's report, however, was for
some a welcome departure from this debate,
his arguments based not on theology but on
reams of scientific research — including
studies showing that condom use does not
significantly lower the rate of sexually transmitted
diseases such as gonorrhea and chlamydia.
Italian immunologist Ferdinando Aiuti, a major
proponent of the use of condoms in fighting the
spread of AIDS, responded to Father
Suaudeau's findings with a figure of his own:
"Reliable studies on controlled couples in
which one of the two is HIV-positive show that
contagion is less than 1 percent."
The head of the Italian Anti-AIDS League,
Vittorio Agnoletto, charged that Father
Suaudeau's study was a case of "ignorance
and disinformation." Agnoletto placed the
security of prophylactics at 98 percent if they
are used correctly.
That's a big "if", Father Suaudeau pointed out
– one to bear in mind along with more fundamental
problems such as leakage, breaks and
degradation of the latex.
The priest immediately found himself engaged
in a debate about how porous condoms are, but
he said that isn’t the real question. "It happens
that sometimes there are channels [through
which the virus can pass] because of irregularities
in the latex," he said.
An Italian condom manufacturer, Hatu Ico of Bologna,
claimed that was "technically impossible."
And Agnoletto claimed in the newspaper La Republica: "The
virus can’t pass through the pores of the prophylactic because
the diameter is larger, and thousands of studies show it."
While prophylactic companies promise that the microscopic
pores in condoms don’t allow the transmission of the virus,
Father Suaudeau said their testing was not sufficient.
"If you want to do real tests, you have to use microspheres,
something the size of the virus," he explained. "Mechanical
tests are not enough."
He pointed out that medical technicians dealing with substances
containing HIV have been told to wear two pairs of
gloves, one on top of the other.
Hatu Ico also made the rather remarkable claim
that only one out of every 20,000 of its products
is defective. It's precisely those kinds of
claims that Father Suaudeau has attempted to
debunk with scientific research.
"All of a sudden, condoms became — for the
groups fighting against AIDS and the politicians
— a kind of absolute weapon," he wrote.
"And questioning that became almost a kind of
blasphemy." The Pontifical Council for the
Family often appears to be "blasphemous" in
the eyes of the secular world, and Father
Suaudeau is no different. He insists that the
only really "safe sex" is in a faithfully monogamous
marriage.
Best defense?
In his study, Father Suaudeau points out the
multiple weaknesses of prophylactics one by
one.
The failure of condoms in preventing pregnancy
(defined as the probability of pregnancy
in the course of a year for a woman who relies
only on condoms for contraception) is between
5-30 percent, with an average of 15 percent.
He referred to 10 different studies concerning
condoms and sexually transmitted diseases,
concluding that they are highly effective for
diseases due to bacteria, but weak or useless
for those due to viruses or mycoplasma (a kind
of intermediate between bacteria and viruses).
Father Suaudeau also looked at 19 different studies on the
effectiveness of condoms on populations at risk in different
parts of the globe, concluding that they reduce the risk of HIV
transmission somewhat. But in 10-15 percent of all sexual
acts, condoms fail to prevent the transmission of the AIDS causing
virus.
He looked at the overall AIDS figures in France, where 6,000
new AIDS cases are diagnosed each year, and concluded that
the promotion of condoms has done little to stop the deadly
problem.
"Despite strong campaigns in favor of condoms in the United
States, France and the rest of Europe, there has been a continual
increase in the number of AIDS cases in these countries
since 1981," he wrote.
"If the prevention of HIV infection by the use of condoms had
been effective, there would not be this epidemic that we see
today, but rather a strong decrease or even the disappearance
of AIDS."
Father Suaudeau concludes that using condoms to prevent
AIDS is like playing Russian roulette: "The more someone
multiplies his sexual experiences, convinced of the impunity
given him by condoms, the greater the probability
of contamination," he wrote. "In the
end, it's HIV that wins."
Even if the risk is "only" 10 percent, that's too
much, he said. "What would one say about a
kind of airplane in which 10 percent of the
flights ended up crashing?"
Father Suaudeau pointed out that, rather than
emphasizing condoms, safe-sex gurus should
be urging more important strategies on people,
such as exercising prudence in the choice of
sexual partners, limiting the number of contacts
and, better yet, strict monogamy.
"The AIDS epidemic hasn’t been stopped by
16 years of information and distribution of
condoms, and the failure of this strategy should
be recognized," he said. "The only real, totally
effective strategy is abstinence or faithful
sexual relations within monogamous marriage."
E-mail this page to a friend
Article courtesy JeevOtsav published by the Diocesan Human Life Committee, Archdiocese of Bombay. Copyright © 2004 Jean-Marie Guenois/Our Sunday Visitor. All rights reserved.
|