Commentary on news about teen pregnancy, unmarried sexual behavior, STD, HIV/AIDS, and the sex education controversy from the abstinence until marriage perspective.

Friday, January 14, 2005

Consumer Report: Condom ratings

A report in the February 2005 Consumer Reports magazine has generated controversey. In its testing of 23 kinds of latex condoms, two of the free condom varieties offered by Planned Parenthood scored lowest in air-infiltration tests measuring strength and reliability. Although Planned Parenthood has been dogged in its challenge of the outcomes, testing/evaluation and accuracy of Abstinence education, the same does not seem to apply in-house. As strong proponents of condom use, the fact that their products received the lowest ratings is shameful.

In response to the report, Planned Parenthood:
1) Criticized the testing method
2) Announced that in later "independent testing", the same condoms received excellent ratings
3) Claimed the facts were outdated; their "honeydew" model had already been redesigned. (Did they get prior warning from the CEO of Consumer Reports, a former Planned Parenthood of Maryland president?)

This is the second time in recent years that Planned Parenthood's condoms have made the news. Nonoxynol-9, a spermicidal condom lubricant, was found to cause vaginal damage that facilitated STD/HIV infection. In response, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood removed its condoms that contained the spermicide. However, since nonoxynol-9 was added to condoms by bypassing the FDA claiming it was a lubricant not a spermicide, public trust should have been severely damaged. But since the issue was glossed over in the media, rather than facing hard questions, Planned Parenthood was portrayed as a responsible agency.

Planned Parenthood: You promote condom use to prevent pregnancy, STD and HIV, but deny any responsibility that the approach is not working. You want to educate our children in consistent and correct condom use, but provide them with an inferior product. You claim only your programs are "medically accurate" and "science-based" but the evidence, if publicly presented, paints you into a corner. You blame abstinence advocates for creating public distrust of condoms as a panacea, but have been caught again not telling the whole truth.





0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home