Why the big fuss about condoms?

(Following is the transcript of the segment "Analysis by Winnie Monsod" which aired on News on Q on March 22 , 2010. Prof. Winnie Monsod is the resident analyst of News on Q which airs weeknights at 9:30 p.m. on Q Channel 11.) HIV/AIDS data gathered by the DOH National Epidemiology Center and published monthly in the Philippine HIV and AIDS Registry show that between 2001 and 2009, the number of new cases of HIV/AIDS reported almost quintupled: 174 in 2001 and 835 in 2009. But it was not a steady growth rate. Between 2001 and 2005 the reported number of infections grew by only 21 percent over the four year period. But in the next four years — between 2005 and 2009 — it almost quadrupled (from 210 to 835). Not only that, the number of cases reported in January 2010, just 2 months ago 143, was more than double (2.2 times) the preceding January's 65. Are these data reflective of what is going on globally? The answer is NO. Because globally, the number of reported new HIV/AIDS did not rise, but fell by 17 percent.
In other words, where the rest of the world shows declining new cases, the Philippines is increasing figuratively by leaps and bounds which is probably the basis of Health Secretary Cabral's worry. And which should be cause for worry for the rest of us too. Let's go to the condom effectiveness issue. Are they effective in preventing HIV/AIDS? The answer is Yes, if we listen to the WHO study circa 2000 and the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health study circa 1999. Why are there no studies which are more recent? Apparently because the issue of condom effectiveness has been resolved all that long ago. Maybe there are other countries than the Philippines where questions are being asked, but I couldn't find any. The WHO Fact Sheet No. 243 states: "Laboratory studies have found that viruses (including HIV) do not pass through intact latex condoms even when the devices are stretched or stressed…. " In Thailand, the promotion by the government of 100 percent condom use by commercial sex workers led to a dramatic increase in the use of condoms (from 14 percent in 1990 to 94 percent in 1994); an equally dramatic decline in STD cases (from 410,406 cases in 1987 to 27,362 cases in 1994. ) Studies undertaken on serodiscordant couples, when one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not….well they show that, with consistent condom use, the HIV infection rate among uninfected partners was less than one percent per year, of course, inconsistent condom use can be as risky as not using condoms at all. The Johns Hopkins is more of the same (and probably one source of the WHO fact sheet): "Condoms provide highly effective protection against HIV infection when used correctly with every act of intercourse. All 10 cohort studies conducted through 1995 that evaluated condom use among heterosexual couples showed that consistent condom use protected against HIV." The caveat in all this is that the condoms should be used consistently and correctly, and that the condoms must be of good quality. But, as Johns Hopkins says, "Still, some use is better than none,” and "Narrowing the gap between condom need and use is a major public health challenge….Efforts to increase condom use are a good social, economic, and health investment." But, according to our Catholic prelates, definitely a bad moral/religious move. The question therefore is: will the beneficial social, economic and health aspects outweigh the disadvantageous moral/religious aspects, or will it be vice versa? Or maybe we should rephrase that question so that it really gets down to the nitty-gritty. Will the healthy wives or husbands of those who have AIDS practice abstinence for the rest of their lives, or will they use condoms and jeopardize their immortal soul? What would you do?