Self Improvement Health, Fitness, Diet, Exercise, Religion, Meditation, Beauty, & Attire. In addition to seeking advice on how to deal with social, psychological, and physiological issues.
I am not saying that people should not use condoms or have sex or that condoms do not reduce the risk of HIV infection; but this is another issue. What is being discussed here is the church's stance on these issues, which is perfectly logical for a Christian who practices his religion as i explained in my first post. For others, as a i said before, the pope's and church's stances are irrelevant and it would be up to the person to be conscious enough and have safe sex.
So, condoms reduce the risk of HIV! In other words, banning condoms does not reduce the risk of HIV, on the contrary, it increases it. Thank you, we finally agree.
So, condoms reduce the risk of HIV! In other words, banning condoms does not reduce the risk of HIV, on the contrary, it increases it. Thank you, we finally agree.
This is the whole issue of this thread.
Osi, this was never an issue, my argument was not whether condoms reduce the risk of HIV or not. Of course they do since they are the only available solution right now.
My replies were adressing the poeple who accused the pope of 'killing people' by saying what he said.
eno of course no "reasonnable" man will have sex without a condom
but what the pope is saying that this is not a solution
anyway let them still have sex in this chaotic manner and let them all get aids
half of them already have aids and their kids are born with aids
well believe me no one cares if they are stupid and don't know how to act , someone is trying to awake them and u are mocking him
i don't think that u care more about ppl in africa than the pope ........
Chou khass hay.. bi hay? kif khalatton bi ba3don hol? The pope gave the church's point of view,and whether you want to listen to him or not is a personal choice. So the pope did not deny the right for people to use condoms or have sex, or do anything else, he just explained the church's point of view from these things.
Point is point of views change in time and there is nothing absolute, if he is able to recognize islam and Judaism dialogue with another religion that for the sake of humanity then he should also be able to consider that a condom is crucial for the sake of humanity and condoms stop the trasnfer of deadly diseases, it not an evil that only exists to stop multiplication of humans.
His point of view emanates from the fact that condoms stop multiplication of humans and Europe and America are suffering from aging population and that we shouldn't stop reproduction, yet he fails to see that not using condoms in certain other societies encourages death, so he should get excommunication.
By Edward C. Green
Sunday, March 29, 2009; Page A15
When Pope Benedict XVI commented this month that condom distribution isn't helping, and may be worsening, the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa, he set off a firestorm of protest. Most non-Catholic commentary has been highly critical of the pope. A cartoon in the Philadelphia Inquirer, reprinted in The Post, showed the pope somewhat ghoulishly praising a throng of sick and dying Africans: "Blessed are the sick, for they have not used condoms."
Yet, in truth, current empirical evidence supports him.
We liberals who work in the fields of global HIV/AIDS and family planning take terrible professional risks if we side with the pope on a divisive topic such as this. The condom has become a symbol of freedom and -- along with contraception -- female emancipation, so those who question condom orthodoxy are accused of being against these causes. My comments are only about the question of condoms working to stem the spread of AIDS in Africa's generalized epidemics -- nowhere else.
In 2003, Norman Hearst and Sanny Chen of the University of California conducted a condom effectiveness study for the United Nations' AIDS program and found no evidence of condoms working as a primary HIV-prevention measure in Africa. UNAIDS quietly disowned the study. (The authors eventually managed to publish their findings in the quarterly Studies in Family Planning.) Since then, major articles in other peer-reviewed journals such as the Lancet, Science and BMJ have confirmed that condoms have not worked as a primary intervention in the population-wide epidemics of Africa. In a 2008 article in Science called "Reassessing HIV Prevention" 10 AIDS experts concluded that "consistent condom use has not reached a sufficiently high level, even after many years of widespread and often aggressive promotion, to produce a measurable slowing of new infections in the generalized epidemics of Sub-Saharan Africa."
Let me quickly add that condom promotion has worked in countries such as Thailand and Cambodia, where most HIV is transmitted through commercial sex and where it has been possible to enforce a 100 percent condom use policy in brothels (but not outside of them). In theory, condom promotions ought to work everywhere. And intuitively, some condom use ought to be better than no use. But that's not what the research in Africa shows.
Why not?
One reason is "risk compensation." That is, when people think they're made safe by using condoms at least some of the time, they actually engage in riskier sex.
Another factor is that people seldom use condoms in steady relationships because doing so would imply a lack of trust. (And if condom use rates go up, it's possible we are seeing an increase of casual or commercial sex.) However, it's those ongoing relationships that drive Africa's worst epidemics. In these, most HIV infections are found in general populations, not in high-risk groups such as sex workers, gay men or persons who inject drugs. And in significant proportions of African populations, people have two or more regular sex partners who overlap in time. In Botswana, which has one of the world's highest HIV rates, 43 percent of men and 17 percent of women surveyed had two or more regular sex partners in the previous year.
These ongoing multiple concurrent sex partnerships resemble a giant, invisible web of relationships through which HIV/AIDS spreads. A study in Malawi showed that even though the average number of sexual partners was only slightly over two, fully two-thirds of this population was interconnected through such networks of overlapping, ongoing relationships.
So what has worked in Africa? Strategies that break up these multiple and concurrent sexual networks -- or, in plain language, faithful mutual monogamy or at least reduction in numbers of partners, especially concurrent ones. "Closed" or faithful polygamy can work as well.
In Uganda's early, largely home-grown AIDS program, which began in 1986, the focus was on "Sticking to One Partner" or "Zero Grazing" (which meant remaining faithful within a polygamous marriage) and "Loving Faithfully." These simple messages worked. More recently, the two countries with the highest HIV infection rates, Swaziland and Botswana, have both launched campaigns that discourage people from having multiple and concurrent sexual partners.
Don't misunderstand me; I am not anti-condom. All people should have full access to condoms, and condoms should always be a backup strategy for those who will not or cannot remain in a mutually faithful relationship. This was a key point in a 2004 "consensus statement" published and endorsed by some 150 global AIDS experts, including representatives the United Nations, World Health Organization and World Bank. These experts also affirmed that for sexually active adults, the first priority should be to promote mutual fidelity. Moreover, liberals and conservatives agree that condoms cannot address challenges that remain critical in Africa such as cross-generational sex, gender inequality and an end to domestic violence, rape and sexual coercion.
Surely it's time to start providing more evidence-based AIDS prevention in Africa. The writer is a senior research scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health.
This article explains what i have been trying to say.
In theory, condom promotions ought to work everywhere. And intuitively, some condom use ought to be better than no use. But that's not what the research in Africa shows.
Why not?
One reason is "risk compensation." That is, when people think they're made safe by using condoms at least some of the time, they actually engage in riskier sex.
And the solution that is now being communicated to people in Africa is:
So what has worked in Africa? Strategies that break up these multiple and concurrent sexual networks -- or, in plain language, faithful mutual monogamy or at least reduction in numbers of partners, especially concurrent ones. "Closed" or faithful polygamy can work as well.
In Uganda's early, largely home-grown AIDS program, which began in 1986, the focus was on "Sticking to One Partner" or "Zero Grazing" (which meant remaining faithful within a polygamous marriage) and "Loving Faithfully." These simple messages worked. More recently, the two countries with the highest HIV infection rates, Swaziland and Botswana, have both launched campaigns that discourage people from having multiple and concurrent sexual partners.
And it didnt need a pope or any religious figure to tell them that!
24th March 2009
