Well there goes that anti-condom talking point.
The consistent use of condoms protects against human papillomavirus, a cause of warts and cervical and other female cancers, researchers are reporting today.
In the study, which independent experts said was the most conclusive to examine the role of condoms in preventing infection with the virus, women whose male partners used condoms every time they had sexual intercourse had less than half the rate of infection as did women whose partners used condoms less than 5 percent of the time.
This a great news. Of course, condoms don’t prevent HPV 100% of the time because HPV is transmitted through skin-to-skin contact, and there are obviously some areas of the body where HPV might be present which aren’t covered by a condom during sex. But they’re damn effective if used correctly and consistently. Further, internal (or “female”) condoms cover a greater external area of the vulva, and might be a good option, especially if you know that your partner is infected.
Now the question is, can we expect federally-funded abstinence-only education programs to change their curriculum to present medically accurate information? (Currently, the abstinence-fetishists insist that condoms do not protect against HPV). Can we expect them to recognize that condoms save lives (HPV is a primary cause of cervical cancer) and promote their use among sexually active people? Can we expect that they’ll knock off the stupid, dangerous attempts to put warning labels on condoms?
Perhaps even more pressing: Can we expect our own government to give people accurate information? Because as it stands, they aren’t:
Can condoms help if always used (100% of the time and correctly)?
No evidence that condom use reduces risk of HPV infection. Some evidence that condoms reduce the risk of HPV-associated diseases.
I’m not holding my breath.