8 ms·

Indeed. Hope the government educates them at least on how to prevent pregnancy and also provides the resources. In reality man should also be educated and prov

by meagain20000 11y ago

Indeed. Hope the government educates them at least on how to prevent pregnancy and also provides the resources. In reality man should also be educated and provided with lots of condoms.

ars 11y ago
Condoms don't really work for preventing pregnancy though, the failure rate is too high for that. They have success at reducing pregnancy rates, but not at stopping it.
- meagain20000 11y ago
  I was not aware of this and without some sources I find it hard to believe. If condoms do not prevent pregnancy then they don't prevent anything.
  - deathanatos 11y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods#Effectiveness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_me... No contraceptive is perfect, and the rates vary between methods. Note that some of the methods in the table can be combined (and often are), thus lowering the overall chance of pregnancy. ars's comment seems a bit extreme; while condoms don't perfectly prevent pregnancy, they are certainly quite effective at reducing the chance of it.
  - ars 11y ago
    Correct. They don't prevent, they reduce. Used at typical rates, 18% of women will still get pregnant every year (reduced from 85% - it's a large reduction, but I would not call it prevent). For a situation like this, with (according to geertj's calculations) 40% chance of severe birth defect, that's far too much. Condoms are not the solution here - in fact I think they do more harm than good because people think they work (like you did), while they are not sufficiently effective.
    - meagain20000 11y ago
      Google search: how effective is a condom Result: When used consistently and correctly, condoms are 98% effective in preventing pregnancy and are the only form of birth control that also can prevent STIs.3,7,8 This is why it's important to follow directions for correct use. Somebody is lying.
      - ars 11y ago
        Read up on perfect use vs typical use. Quoting numbers from perfect use is very misleading.
        meagain20000 11y ago
        >>When we talk about the effectiveness of any kind of contraception, including condoms, we reference two different groups of figures. One is perfect use: that means a person always uses their method and always uses it correctly. These results are often figured via lab studies, where perfect use can be verified. The other is typical use: how your average person generally uses a method. For instance, it’s typical use for women to take a birth control pill late or miss one now and then, have a patch slip off, or only put a condom on after intercourse has already begun. Typical use rates also include not using a given method at all. In other words, the typical use rate for condoms is about people who, when asked what method of birth control they use, say condoms, even if they only use a condom one out of every three times they have intercourse. - See more at: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/10/02/get-real-how-well-will-condoms-really-work/#sthash.c0uPBqwD.dpuf http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/10/02/get-real-how-we... << So in essence a condom works if you use it and if you don't use it and get pregnant it is not very effective. WTF? At this point I'm cursing for wasting my time.
        Mz 11y ago
        No. Condoms can tear, are more effective when also used with a spermicide, etc. "Perfect" use increases effectiveness, but even if you aren't just derpy about it, they can still fail. I routinely see this assumption that birth control works perfectly if you just use it, and that simply isn't true.
gpvos 11y ago
It's going to be really interesting to see the response of the RC church to this.
- Karunamon 11y ago
  Well, they don't have any problem with correcting hereditary problems in the womb[1], and it appears okay to straight up not have kids if you know you have a problem that's going to affect the fetus as well[2]. What they absolutely aren't okay with is finding out the child has microcephaly, and aborting as a result. It's my own personal read on canon law that giving birth in such an environment, to the point where the civil authorities are saying "please don't", would present an unacceptable risk to the child, and thus be immoral, and thus be a sin. [1]: http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-position-on-prenatal-diagnosis-and-fetal-research/ http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-posit... [2]: http://www2.loras.edu/~CatholicHE/Arch/Sexuality/Genetic_dis_comment.html http://www2.loras.edu/~CatholicHE/Arch/Sexuality/Genetic_dis... Don't expect a sudden 180 on birth control. The advice for people will be to abstain.
  - knughit 11y ago
    >The advice for people will be to abstain. Which is a well-proven failed strategy.
    - Karunamon 11y ago
      Tangent, and not a particularly religious one: Why does sex seem to get a pass for "you can't control your biological impulses" when other drives don't? - We're driven to eat as well, and have a growing problem with obesity. At least, when you eat too much, you're only harming yourself. Yet, we (the society "we") tut at the obese, in some cases make fun of them. "Why can't you control yourself?" we say. "Put down the fork!" says another. - We have a drive to be social, yet humans are pretty well controlled when it comes to expressing that drive at the wrong times in the wrong places. - It's expected to be protective of your family, but in another time, that would have meant meting out lethal punishment to an interloper. Now, doing that lands you a prison sentence. Without moralizing on any of this: The drive to reproduce, we somehow don't expect people to stop screwing when it's likely that doing so will have really awful consequences for a perfectly innocent life. Either now, in the case of a virus causing congenital defects, or in other cases, such as not being able to support a child. We throw our hands up, say "welp, abstience doesn't work, knock yourselves out", and try to work around the problem with birth control (something which still has a <100% chance of stopping unwanted births) Why is this? Surrender to the implacable force of human nature doesn't seem to be the answer, seeing as how we've at least partially tamed most other impulses, or at least refused to give up.

Indeed. Hope the government educates them at least on how to prevent pregnancy and also provides the resources. In reality man should also be educated and provided with lots of condoms.

ars 11y ago

Condoms don't really work for preventing pregnancy though, the failure rate is too high for that. They have success at reducing pregnancy rates, but not at stopping it.

meagain20000 11y ago
I was not aware of this and without some sources I find it hard to believe. If condoms do not prevent pregnancy then they don't prevent anything.
- deathanatos 11y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods#Effectiveness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_me... No contraceptive is perfect, and the rates vary between methods. Note that some of the methods in the table can be combined (and often are), thus lowering the overall chance of pregnancy. ars's comment seems a bit extreme; while condoms don't perfectly prevent pregnancy, they are certainly quite effective at reducing the chance of it.
- ars 11y ago
  Correct. They don't prevent, they reduce. Used at typical rates, 18% of women will still get pregnant every year (reduced from 85% - it's a large reduction, but I would not call it prevent). For a situation like this, with (according to geertj's calculations) 40% chance of severe birth defect, that's far too much. Condoms are not the solution here - in fact I think they do more harm than good because people think they work (like you did), while they are not sufficiently effective.
  - meagain20000 11y ago
    Google search: how effective is a condom Result: When used consistently and correctly, condoms are 98% effective in preventing pregnancy and are the only form of birth control that also can prevent STIs.3,7,8 This is why it's important to follow directions for correct use. Somebody is lying.
    - ars 11y ago
      Read up on perfect use vs typical use. Quoting numbers from perfect use is very misleading.
      - meagain20000 11y ago
        >>When we talk about the effectiveness of any kind of contraception, including condoms, we reference two different groups of figures. One is perfect use: that means a person always uses their method and always uses it correctly. These results are often figured via lab studies, where perfect use can be verified. The other is typical use: how your average person generally uses a method. For instance, it’s typical use for women to take a birth control pill late or miss one now and then, have a patch slip off, or only put a condom on after intercourse has already begun. Typical use rates also include not using a given method at all. In other words, the typical use rate for condoms is about people who, when asked what method of birth control they use, say condoms, even if they only use a condom one out of every three times they have intercourse. - See more at: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/10/02/get-real-how-well-will-condoms-really-work/#sthash.c0uPBqwD.dpuf http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/10/02/get-real-how-we... << So in essence a condom works if you use it and if you don't use it and get pregnant it is not very effective. WTF? At this point I'm cursing for wasting my time.
        Mz 11y ago
        No. Condoms can tear, are more effective when also used with a spermicide, etc. "Perfect" use increases effectiveness, but even if you aren't just derpy about it, they can still fail. I routinely see this assumption that birth control works perfectly if you just use it, and that simply isn't true.

gpvos 11y ago

It's going to be really interesting to see the response of the RC church to this.

Karunamon 11y ago
Well, they don't have any problem with correcting hereditary problems in the womb[1], and it appears okay to straight up not have kids if you know you have a problem that's going to affect the fetus as well[2]. What they absolutely aren't okay with is finding out the child has microcephaly, and aborting as a result. It's my own personal read on canon law that giving birth in such an environment, to the point where the civil authorities are saying "please don't", would present an unacceptable risk to the child, and thus be immoral, and thus be a sin. [1]: http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-position-on-prenatal-diagnosis-and-fetal-research/ http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-posit... [2]: http://www2.loras.edu/~CatholicHE/Arch/Sexuality/Genetic_dis_comment.html http://www2.loras.edu/~CatholicHE/Arch/Sexuality/Genetic_dis... Don't expect a sudden 180 on birth control. The advice for people will be to abstain.
- knughit 11y ago
  >The advice for people will be to abstain. Which is a well-proven failed strategy.
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    Tangent, and not a particularly religious one: Why does sex seem to get a pass for "you can't control your biological impulses" when other drives don't? - We're driven to eat as well, and have a growing problem with obesity. At least, when you eat too much, you're only harming yourself. Yet, we (the society "we") tut at the obese, in some cases make fun of them. "Why can't you control yourself?" we say. "Put down the fork!" says another. - We have a drive to be social, yet humans are pretty well controlled when it comes to expressing that drive at the wrong times in the wrong places. - It's expected to be protective of your family, but in another time, that would have meant meting out lethal punishment to an interloper. Now, doing that lands you a prison sentence. Without moralizing on any of this: The drive to reproduce, we somehow don't expect people to stop screwing when it's likely that doing so will have really awful consequences for a perfectly innocent life. Either now, in the case of a virus causing congenital defects, or in other cases, such as not being able to support a child. We throw our hands up, say "welp, abstience doesn't work, knock yourselves out", and try to work around the problem with birth control (something which still has a <100% chance of stopping unwanted births) Why is this? Surrender to the implacable force of human nature doesn't seem to be the answer, seeing as how we've at least partially tamed most other impulses, or at least refused to give up.