In this article I want to express some positions proposed by the Catholic Church regarding ethical issues relating to human life, health, sexuality, parenthood and marriage.
Husband and wife participate together with God in the creation of new human persons. Yet, in relation to God, they are subordinate to Him, and must accept His creative Plan and Law. Although the husband and wife participate in the formation of the material body of the new person, God creates the immaterial soul.
The Catholic Church also consistently teaches that the inherent connection between the marital act and conception must not be separated.
Contraception and sterilization are mortal sins because they separate the marital act and conception. More detailed explanations can be found in the Catholic documents: "Declaration on Procured Abortion", [1] "Humanae vitae",[2] "Donum vitae",[3] and "Casti connubii".[4]
56. Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.
57. We admonish, therefore priests who hear confessions and others who have the care of souls, in virtue of Our supreme authority and in Our solicitude for the salvation of souls, not to allow the faithful entrusted to them to err regarding this most grave law of God; much more, that they keep themselves immune from such false opinions, in no way conniving in them. If any confessor of pastor of souls, which may God forbid, lead the faithful entrusted to him into these errors, or should at least confirm them by approval or by guilty silence, let him be mindful of the fact that he must render a strict account to God, the Supreme Judge, for the betrayal of his sacred trust, and let him take to himself the words of Christ: "They are blind and leaders of the blind: and if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit. (Mt 15,14)
In 1968 Pope Paul VI gave us the important and well known encyclical, Humanae vitae. Here we find the following Church teachings:
"Equally to be excluded, as the teaching authority of the Church has frequently declared, is direct sterilization, whether perpetual or temporary, whether of the man or of the woman. Similarly excluded is every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, propose, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible.
To justify conjugal acts made intentionally infecund, one cannot invoke as valid reasons the lesser evil, or the fact that such acts would constitute a whole together with the fecund acts already performed or to follow later, and hence would share in one and the same moral goodness. In truth, if it is sometimes licit to tolerate a lesser evil in order to avoid a greater evil to promote a greater good, it is not licit, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil so that good may follow therefrom; that is to make into the object of a positive act of the will something which is intrinsically disorder, and hence unworthy of the human person, even when the intention is to safeguard or promote individual, family or social well-being. Consequently it is an error to think that a conjugal act which is deliberately made infecund and so is intrinsically dishonest could be made honest and right by the ensemble of a fecund conjugal life." (HV 14)
"In the task of transmitting life, therefore, they are not free to proceed completely at will, as if they could determine in a wholly autonomous way the honest path to follow; but they must conform their activity to the creative intention of God, expressed in the very nature of marriage and of its acts, and manifested by the constant teaching of the Church" (HV 10)
"..Upright men can even better convince themselves of the solid grounds on which the teaching of the Church in this field is based, if they care to reflect upon the consequences of methods of artificial birth control. Let them consider, first of all, how wide and easy a road would thus be opened up towards conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality. Not much experience is needed in order to know human weakness, and to understand that men -- especially the young, who are so vulnerable on this point -- have need of encouragement to be faithful to the moral law, so that they must not be offered some easy means of eluding its observance. It is also to be feared that the man, growing used to the employment of anti-conceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer his respected and beloved companion." (HV 17)
"Consequently, if the mission of generating life is not to be exposed to the arbitrary will of men, one must necessarily recognize insurmountable limits to the possibility of man's domination over his own body and its functions; limits which no man, whether a private individual or one invested with authority, may licitly surpass. And such limits cannot be determined otherwise than by the respect due to the integrity of the human organism and its functions, according to the principles recalled earlier, and also according to the correct understanding of the "principle of totality" illustrated by our predecessor Pope Pius XII" (HV 17)
These words are seen to have been profoundly prophetic. Contraception, sterilization, abortion, deceptive and sinful "sex-education" have really brought nations to the dangerous edge of population extinction, as well as facilitated the ignorance of the marriage and massive AIDS and STD epidemic among our peoples.
Once the State opens the doors for contraception and sterilization, it also opens the doors for tragic consequences for its people. Through these State gates enter different international institutes with perverse agendas and corrupt programs for the use of contraception and sterilization as a method for genocide. The tragic demographic situation now prevalent in many countries today did not happen naturally, but rather was the willful product of well-thought out interventions and planning by anti-life activists who explicitly or covertly advocate such tragic (or worse) outcomes. These activists must be seen for what they are and stopped. Pope John Paul II observes this tragic situation in his encyclical Evangelium vitae (Par. 12):
"In this way a kind of "conspiracy against life" is unleashed. This conspiracy involves not only individuals in their personal, family or group relationships, but goes far beyond, to the point of damaging and distorting, at the international level, relations between peoples and States."
However, when there is a serious and justifiable reason to avoid conception, there is a solution without sin. There are natural methods which require abstinence during the fertile part of a woman's cycle (the Billings or Sympto-thermal methods). Of course, it is still necessary to respect the fact that human sexuality may not be used outside of a marriage blessed by God, a marriage which is indissoluble.
When using these natural methods properly during the infertile days of a woman's cycle, a husband and wife do not violate their marital relationship, but they must remain open towards accepting a new child if the method fails.
In his address to the Association of Catholic Pharmacists in Italy (1994), the Holy Father Pope John Paul II invoked the high traditions of the pharmaceutical profession in mentioning the previous teachings of Pope Pius XII and Pope Paul VI. The Holy Father reminded them:
"Participation in the attacks against the life and integrity of the person, against procreation or against the moral and mental health of mankind, can not be accepted....Also it is impossible to look for the benefits from the delivery of products which humiliate the person" (Medicina e morale 4, 1994, p. 762).
That is, pharmacists and others are not morally permitted to produce, sell, advertise and distribute contraceptives and abortifacients.
In Donum vitae [3] (Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith) which was approved by the Holy Father Pope John Paul II, it is explained why artificial fertilization (e.g., artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization) and cloning are forbidden and cannot be accepted.
Not only is the sperm obtained in a sinful way, but conception takes place without the specific act of conjugal love. Those who participate in in vitro fertilization (IVF) say that less than 5% of the children so conceived are ever born. Even the majority of those human embryos who are placed in the woman's uterus with the aim of implantation and birth die because of unnatural conditions.
We heard that many children conceived by IVF have been killed in other ways, e.g., used in lethal experiments involving human embryo research, human cloning, human genetic engineering, etc. Many IVF children remain alive while frozen in deep freezers in IVF clinics and other laboratories.
Among the many important teachings in Donum vitae, consider these words:
" ... the child has the right, as already mentioned, to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents; and he also has the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception." (DV, 59).
Such rights would also involve prohibiting the means to perform IVF, e.g., the ordering and distributing of the hormone drugs used to stimulate the release of the woman's oocytes in preparation for IVF.
Donum Vitae also says:
"... Homologous IVF and ET is brought about outside the bodies of the couple through actions of third parties whose competence and technical activity determine the success of the procedure. Such fertilization entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children.
Conception in vitro is the result of the technical action which presides over fertilization. Such fertilization is neither in fact achieved nor positively willed as the expression and fruit of a specific act of the conjugal union.." ... ".... For the same reasons the so-called "simple case", i.e. a homologous IVF and ET procedure that is free of any compromise with the abortive practice of destroying embryos and with masturbation, remains a technique which is morally illicit because it deprives human procreation of the dignity which is proper and connatural to it. ... the Church remain opposed from the moral point of view to homologous 'in vitro' fertilization. Such fertilization is in itself illicit and in opposition to the dignity of procreation and of the conjugal union, even when everything is done to avoid the death of the human embryo…"
"…Artificial insemination as a substitute for the conjugal act is prohibited by reason of the voluntarily achieved dissociation of the two meanings of the conjugal act. Masturbation, through which the sperm is normally obtained, is another sign of this dissociation: even when it is done for the purpose of procreation, the act remains deprived of its unitive meaning: "It lacks the sexual relationship called for by the moral order, namely the relationship which realizes 'the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love' ".(54)
"The Church's teaching on marriage and human procreation affirms the "inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning... ...Contraception deliberately deprives the conjugal act of its openness to procreation and in this way brings about a voluntary dissociation of the ends of marriage. Homologous artificial fertilization, in seeking a procreation which is not the fruit of a specific act of conjugal union, objectively effects an analogous separation between the goods and the meanings of marriage."
"... As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of his conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights...."
"... A true and proper right to a child would be contrary to the child's dignity and nature. The child is not an object to which one has a right, nor can he be considered as an object of ownership: rather, a child is a gift, "the supreme gift" (58) and the most gratuitous gift of marriage, and is a living testimony of the mutual giving of his parents...". (DV 8).
The life of the new human person begins at the first moment of fertilization, and at the first moment of the similar event caused asexually by cloning (e.g., twinning, "nuclear transfer", etc.) and other sinful genetic engineering methods.
It is empirically documented by the immediate production of specifically human proteins and enzymes vi[5] that the new child is specifically an individual member of the human species and fully alive immediately from the first moment of his/her existence - regardless of the method of reproduction used. From this first moment it is known empirically that the human child is a genetically unique boy or a girl, [6] what the color of his or her eyes and hair will be, directs his or her own continuous development, vii[7] the functioning of future organs, many aspects of his or her future temperament, etc.
The just-conceived child is the most precious of the creatures of the cosmos contained in the smallest amount of matter.
The only difference between the born and the unborn child is their location, yet location does not determine what something is or isn't; its biological nature does.
In Evangelium vitae (Par. 73) the Holy Father warned about flaunting the will of God:
"In the Old Testament, precisely in regard to threats against life, we find a significant example of resistance to the unjust command of those in authority. After Pharaoh ordered the killing of all newborn males, the Hebrew midwives refused. "They did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live" (Exodus 1:17). But the ultimate reason for their action should be noted: "the midwives feared God" (ibid. ). It is precisely from obedience to God -- to whom alone is due that fear which is acknowledgment of his absolute sovereignty -- that the strength and the courage to resist unjust human laws are born. It is the strength and the courage of those prepared even to be imprisoned or put to the sword, in the certainty that this is what makes for "the endurance and faith of the saints" (Revelation 13:10).
Killers of unborn children use not only "surgical" kinds of abortions, but many other different, new methods.
Stressing the importance to protect the life of all unborn children, the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law declared on November 24, 1988, that abortion is not only "the expulsion of the immature fetus," but is also "the killing of the same fetus in any way and at any time from the moment of conception."
There are different so called "contraceptive" methods through which fertilization occurs and which kill babies usually in the first days of their life.
This is also how the intrauterine device (IUD) also kills children. xi[9] While using the IUD, fertilization occurs, but the IUD prevents the child from implanting in the mother's womb, thus killing the child in the first days of his or her life. The absence of menstrual bleeding means that the child survived this assault and successfully implanted .
The IUD also causes a healthy woman to become sick, e.g., excessive bleeding, pain, anemia, suppuration-purulence of the uterus, the Fallopian tubes and the abdomen. While taking each kind of Pill, ovulation and conception still often occur. However, the baby usually dies from starvation because the Pill dehydrates the glands and decreases the food supply (glycogen) in the endometrium (the lining of the womb). If, while the mother was on the Pill, she missed her period, it is an indication the child survived. The killing of the child either before or after implantation is abortion and never permissible.
The Pill is also the cause of many serious diseases such as breast cancer, cancer of the womb, heart attacks, strokes, phlebitis, embolisms etc.
Even while taking Depo-Provera, using "contraceptive" implants, post-coital interventions, and HCG vaccines, etc., fertilization can still take place, thus these methods too kill innocent children.
We also hear of those who kill so many children conceived during IVF and who are "donated" to "scientists" for research in human cloning, stem cell research, and genetic engineering.
Jesus said: "Truly, I say to you: whenever you did this to one of the least of these my brothers you did it to Me." (Matthew 25:40). These tiny newly-conceived babies are the "least" of our brothers and sisters. What we do to them is what we do to Jesus.
The Fifth Commandment of God is: "You shall not kill!"
It also means that participation in early amniocentesis and similar prenatal diagnostic procedure which aim at hunting down and killing some children is forbidden. Another argument against amniocentesis is that the needle used in this immoral procedure itself sometimes kills the child, or increases the spread of the infection laying quiescent and asymptomatic inside the mother's body before the puncture.
When students of medicine become doctors upon receiving their Diplomas, they publicly profess the Geneva formulation of the Hippocratic Oath:
"I will absolutely respect human life from the moment of conception ... I make these promises solemnly, freely, and upon my honor."
It is not allowed to kill even a sick unborn child. No one is truly happy when they have participated in the killing of innocent human children. However, we can become happy by supporting the life of sick persons. Each honest medical worker knows that.
The life of both mother and child are precious. Thus when a pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, we must try to save both lives - that of the mother and that of the child.
The basic moral principle is: "Evil is never allowed that good may come of it." Regardless of some perceived "good", one may not perform an evil action in order to attain it. As Holy Father Pope Paul VI wrote in his encyclical Humanae vitae:
"In conformity with these landmarks in the human and Christian vision of marriage, we must once again declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun, and, above all, directly willed and procured abortion, even if for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as licit means of regulating birth" (HV 14)
Regarding rape, we know that conception happens very rarely. Still, it is necessary to stress the fact that any child conceived by such a crime (or by any other crime) has a right to his or her life, and that these children too may not be killed.
If the mother does not want to care for the child after birth, there are many good people who are desperately looking for children to adopt and want to provide them with parental love.
In the chapter on "Moral and Civil Law" in Donum vitae stresses the important role of the law in protecting unborn children:
"As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be insured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights. The law cannot tolerate--indeed it must expressly forbid--that human beings, even at the embryonic stage, should be treated as objects of experimentation, be mutilated or destroyed with the excuse that they are superfluous or incapable of developing normally."
It is forbidden to participate in either active or passive euthanasia. xi[9] In Evangelium vitae (Chapter 65), the Holy Father explains:
"Euthanasia in the strict sense is understood to be an action or omission which of itself and by intention causes death, with the purpose of eliminating all suffering."
"Euthanasia's terms of reference, therefore, are to be found in the intention of the will and in the methods used".
On May 20, 2004, in granting an audience to the participants of the congress, "Life-sustaining Treatments and the Vegetative State: Scientific Advances and Ethical Dilemmas", the Holy Father Pope John Paul II declared in a lengthy address that patients in a "vegetative state" do not lose their dignity or rights, and that withholding food and water from them amounts to euthanasia by omission:
"Our brothers and sisters who are in the clinical condition of 'vegetative state' preserve all their human dignity," he said. "God the Father continues to look upon them lovingly, recognizing them as his children, especially in need of assistance. ... "Therefore, the sick person, in a vegetative state, awaiting recovery or his natural end, has the right to basic health care, and to the prevention of complications linked to his state." ... "I feel the duty to affirm energetically that the intrinsic value and personal dignity of every human being does not change, regardless of the circumstances of his life." ... "A man, even if he is gravely ill or limited in the exercise of his higher functions, is and always will be a man, he will never become a 'vegetable' or an 'animal,'"
The Holy Father stressed:
"Doctors and health agents, society and the Church have moral duties toward these persons, of which they cannot exempt themselves without betraying the demands of professional deontology and of human and Christian solidarity. The prolongation of the vegetative state "cannot justify ethically the abandonment or interruption of the minimal care of the patient, including food and water." John Paul II highlighted the moral principle, according to which "even the simple doubt of finding oneself in the presence of a living person already poses the obligation of full respect for him and of abstaining from any action that would seek to anticipate his death." xi[9]
When someone cannot eat or drink normally, food can be given by naso-gastric tube, pharyngostomy, gastrostomy, jejunostomy, intravenous infusion, etc.
The State too has an obligation to protect the lives of its people. Thus euthanasia, assisted suicide and other means for the killing of innocent human beings must be legally banned.
Sometimes it happens that even the children and relatives of a sick person do not care for them. Perhaps they care more for the animals than for their own parents and grandparents. This is terrible, and a form of euthanasia by omission as well. If their cow or pig becomes sick, they immediately invite the veterinarian to come and rescue the animal. But when an old human person becomes sick, sometimes they don't invite a doctor on time. Sometimes they bring such a person to the hospital when it is already too late. Bronchopneumonia has already set in, the heart has been in a critical state for too long, the cancer has already spread, or the patient is experiencing extreme dehydration. If the doctors ask a son or daughter-in-law where they were earlier, why did they wait, we hear the terrible words, "Doctor, do not worry so, we know that it is the time that this person dies."
The son or daughter have convicted their own father or mother to death! We don't know when it is "the time" for someone to die. Only God knows this. And our duty is to provide systematic doctor checkups, give adequate treatment that saves lives, and provide the necessary clothes and food.
There are also cases, unfortunately, where even medical personnel do not provide adequate diagnostic procedures, treatments or preventive care for their patients.
Sometimes even medical workers participate in the killing by passive euthanasia in different ways. If the patient has a cancer which cannot be removed by operation or by other different treatments, sometimes medical workers don't treat or try to prevent the other diseases which appear. Thus sometimes a patient doesn't die because of his or her cancer, but because of bronchopneumonia, heart disease, dehydration, influenza, starvation, or the presence of decubitus, etc. Decubitus can be prevented by adequate nursing, moving the patient's body, and special beds. Bronchopneumonia among patients who lie in beds can also be prevented by special breathing exercises.
Unfortunately, sometimes medical workers also don't care for their patients when they realize that no one is visiting or cares about them. Instead of adequate diagnostic procedures and treatments that will help their patients live, instead of helping such patients move and walk, they give them sedatives and opiates (morphium, etc.), urinary catheters, etc. Especially old people become lost, don't know where they are or what is happening to them. They begin to sleep, don't breathe normally, don't eat or drink, and soon die from such neglect because of bronchopneumonia, urinary infections, decubitus, dehydration or starvation. This is also euthanasia, and must not be tolerated.
Regarding pain, it is necessary to mention that patients feel pain more intensely if they are hungry or thirsty, if it is too cold or hot in the room, and when there is no one close to them who expresses to them their love and pays them attention. Bad relations with members of the patient's family or with others, and the lack of reconciliation for their sins, also cause patients to lack much needed peace in their souls.
In such situations some patients may not say exactly what their real problem is, but simply complain about the pain they feel.
Medical workers and the others should know that there are no "pain-killers" or sedatives that can solve the spiritual problems caused by the patient's sins which burden the soul. "Pain-killers" and sedatives can not heal spiritual wounds, cannot heal the lack of love or the lack of reconciliation, but bring many bad effects, and sometimes even kill the patient.
Each patient has the right to be offered the Holy Sacraments of Confession, Anointment, Baptism, etc. We don't know if the patient will accept them, but the Christian and human duty of medical workers, of the members of the patient's family, and of many others is to at least offer them to the patient, and to help them prepare for their meeting with God.
When there is serious physical pain that cannot be removed by treating the cause of the pain, unfortunately, some medical workers ignore effective and easy ways to stop the pain, e.g., the use of epidural analgesy and other anesthetic therapies that do not cause serious systematic effects.
In the document of the Pontifical Council for the Family, "The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality", xii[11] it is written:
135. "Today parents should be attentive to ways in which an immoral education can be passed on to their children through various methods promoted by groups with positions and interests contrary to Christian morality".
126. "No material of an erotic nature should be presented to children or young people of any age, individually or in a group."
127. "No one should ever be invited, let alone obliged, to act in any way that could objectively offend against modesty or which could subjectively offend against his or her own delicacy or sense of privacy.
This principle of respect for the child excludes all improper forms of involving children and young people. In this regard, among other things, this can include the following methods that abuse sex education: (a) every "dramatized" representation, mime or "role playing" which depict genital or erotic matters, (b) making drawings, charts or models etc. of this nature, (c) seeking personal information about sexual questions[156] or asking that family information be divulged, (d) oral or written exams about genital or erotic questions".
136. "In the first place, parents must reject secularized and anti-natalist sex education, which puts God at the margin of life and regards the birth of a child as a threat. This sex education is spread by large organizations and international associations that promote abortion, sterilization and contraception. These organizations want to impose a false lifestyle against the truth of human sexuality. Working at national or state levels, these organizations try to arouse the fear of the "threat of over-population" among children and young people to promote the contraceptive mentality, that is, the "anti-life" mentality. They spread false ideas about the "reproductive health" and "sexual and reproductive rights" of young people.[161] Furthermore, some antinatalist organizations maintain those clinics which, violating the rights of parents, provide abortion and contraception for young people, thus promoting promiscuity and consequently an increase in teenage pregnancies. "As we look towards the year 2000, how can we fail to think of the young? What is being held up to them? A society of 'things' and not of 'persons'. The right to do as they will from their earliest years, without any constraint, provided it is 'safe'. The unreserved gift of self, mastery of one's instincts, the sense of responsibility -- these are notions considered as belonging to another age."
138. "In some societies professional associations of sex-educators, sex-counsellors and sex-therapists are operating. Because their work is often based on unsound theories, lacking scientific value and closed to an authentic anthropology, theories that do not recognize the true value of chastity, parents should regard such associations with great caution, no matter what official recognition they may have received. When their outlook is out of harmony with the teachings of the Church, this is evident not only in their work, but also in their publications which are widely diffused in various countries."
139. "Another abuse occurs whenever sex education is given to children by teaching them all the intimate details of genital relationships, even in a graphic way. Today this is often motivated by wanting to provide education for "safe sex", above all in relation to the spread of AIDS. In this situation, parents must also reject the promotion of so-called "safe sex" or "safer sex", a dangerous and immoral policy based on the deluded theory that the condom can provide adequate protection against AIDS. Parents must insist on continence outside marriage and fidelity in marriage as the only true and secure education for the prevention of this contagious disease".
Those who promote the use of condoms are guilty, since in fact they promote a sinful lifestyle. And when they claim that the use of condoms promote "safe-sex" they also become responsible for the death of so many people who become infected by various lethal diseases in spite of their use of condoms.
In the Atlanta - GA, US Dept. of Health, Education and Wellfare's "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (April 1, 1988, Vol. 37, No. S-4), that:
"HIV has been isolated from blood, semen, saliva, tears, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, amniotic fluid, breast milk cervical secretions, and the tissues of infected humans and experimentally infected non-human primates. ...the skin (especially when scratches, cuts, abrasions, dermatitis, or other lesions are present) and mucous membranes of the eye, nose, mouth and possibly the respiratory tract (trachea, bronchi, lungs) should be considered as potential pathways for entry of the virus."
Cardinal López Trujillo, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, spoke on Vatican Radio (October 11, 2003) about the ineffectiveness of the condom in preventing sexually transmitted diseases. This interview was published by Zenit News Agency Service on November 11, 2003. In his address the Cardinal stated:
"One cannot really speak of "safe sex," leading people to believe that the use of condoms is the formula to avoid the risk of HIV and thus to overcome the AIDS pandemic. Nor should people be led to believe that condoms provide absolute safety. They do not mention that there is a percentage of grave risk, not only of AIDS, but also of the different sexually transmitted diseases, and that the rate of failure is quite high...Thus, to talk of condom as "safe sex" is a form of Russian roulette!".
On June 12-13, 2000, four U.S. government agencies [13] co-sponsored a Workshop precisely called "to evaluate the published evidence establishing the effectiveness of latex male condoms in preventing HIV/AIDS and other STDs". The Workshop Summary ("Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention") was prepared later. The "Summary Report" has been prepared by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIH, DHHS) on July 20, 2001. The Human papilloma virus (HPV) is given some more attention, with the conclusion stating clearly that "[t]here was no evidence that condom use reduced the risk of HPV infection . . ."[14]
HPV is a very important STD that is associated with cervical cancer, which in the U.S. kills many more women than does the HIV virus. [15] More than 99% of women with cancer of the cervix are infected by HPV. That is how promotion of condoms has helped the spread of HPV infection and cancer of the uterus.
The Workshop also studied in particular the transmission of other genital infections among condom users. The "Conclusion" of the Workshop Summary makes it obvious that those who use condoms can still be infected by gonorrhea, Chlamydia, trichomoniasis, genital herpes, chancroid and syphilis. This same Workshop Summary could not claim in its conclusion that condoms offer any percentage of protection against these diseases.
There are many other diseases that can be transmitted by sexual contact that were not even analyzed at this Workshop (e.g., B and C hepatitis, infectious mononucleosis, tuberculosis, pediculosis pubis, scabies, etc.).
This is why it is necessary to: