home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!sunic!ericom!exucom.exu.ericsson.se!texsun!cronkite.Central.Sun.COM!news2me.EBay.Sun.COM!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!pburch
- From: pburch@roc.mbcr.bcm.tmc.edu (Paula Burch)
- Newsgroups: misc.kids
- Subject: Re: SAFE SEX or SAFER SEX?
- Message-ID: <1k3ps1INNfa5@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>
- Date: 26 Jan 93 16:45:53 GMT
- References: <16B61ADAE.M18611@MBVM.Mitre.Org> <1k1gl2INNaqm@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> <1993Jan25.214145.625@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>
- Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
- Lines: 49
- NNTP-Posting-Host: roc.mbcr.bcm.tmc.edu
- Originator: pburch@roc.mbcr.bcm.tmc.edu
-
-
- nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
- > pburch@roc.mbcr.bcm.tmc.edu (Paula Burch) writes:
- > >
- > >"Safe sex" is really an epidemiological concept. If EVERYONE used latex
- > >condoms every time, then there would not be an AIDS epidemic, period.
- > >That's pretty darned safe. Promotion of condom usage now could save
- > >millions of lives in the next decade or two, even though condoms are
- > >imperfect.
- >
- > This is assuming that AIDS is only transmitted through sexual intercourse.
- >
- > Reminds me of the three junkies passing around a needle, and a fourth
- > guy walks over and tells them that's dangerous, and one looks up and
- > says "Oh, it's OK. We're all wearing condoms."
-
- Nope, this is pointing out that one of the major modes of HIV transmission
- has been via sex, and cutting that down to the degree that condoms make
- possible would have been sufficient to prevent the epidemic from becoming
- one, and even now could change the course of the epidemic drastically.
- The cheapest public health measure we can now take is to promote the use
- of condoms--it really could save millions of lives.
-
- If a virus is passed at a rate we'll call x, and y percentage of the
- population has the infection, then an epidemic can be stopped by lowering
- x. It's not necessary to reduce x to zero in order to stop the epidemic.
- Plus, the lower you can make y (as a result of reducing x), the less chance
- there is of any individual acquiring the infection, even at the new,
- lowered but non-zero rate of x.
-
- People who don't want to fund condom promotion and addiction-recovery
- programs with their tax dollars forget that it's in the best
- interests of their own children to lower the value of y, the percentage
- of the population that has the infection. You can never be 100% sure
- that your darling child will never do something stupid.
-
- People who think that they can prevent their children from experimenting
- with sex as teenagers forget the importance of rebellion to teens.
- The more you lecture them about abstinence, the more they want to have
- sex. They may just develop the underlying belief that they deserve to
- die for wanting such a sinful thing. When I was in college, I knew a few
- people who felt driven to rebel against particularly stern parents, and
- yet felt that they must be horribly wicked for doing so. They did
- rebel, though--and also took horrible risks to punish themselves, such
- as drunk driving or using drugs they knew to be unsafe. So guess what
- risks today's teens are probably punishing themselves with....
-
- Paula Burch
- pburch@bcm.tmc.edu
-