8 years, 11 months ago UthavmomKeymasterGerman Study Says Condoms Contain Cancer-causing ChemicalA German scientific research institute has warned that most condoms on the market contain a cancer-causing chemical and has urged that their manufacture be subjected to stringent quality control.The Chemical and Veterinary Investigation Institute in Stuttgart said on Friday it had found the carcinogen N-Nitrosamine in 29 of 32 types of condoms it tested in simulated conditions.The condoms, which were kept in a solution with artificial sweat, exuded huge amounts of cancer-causing N-Nitrosamine from its rubber coating. Researchers measured amounts of N-Nitrosamine, that were way above the prescribed limits for other rubber products such as baby pacifiers."N-Nitrosamine is one of the most carcinogenic substances," the study’s authors said. "There is a pressing need for manufacturers to tackle this problem."The study said that the carcinogen is thought to be present in a substance used to improve condom elasticity. When the rubber material comes in contact with human bodily fluids, it can release traces of N-Nitrosamine.No immediate health riskBut since there are no prescribed limits of N-Nitrosamine for condoms, the study hasn’t caused panic among manufacturers or mass-recalling of the products from counters.Local government officials said condom users should not stop using rubber contraceptives based on the results of the study because N-Nitrosamine does not present an immediate health risk.The Baden-Würtemmberg Social Ministry said it didn’t think "it posed a risk." Authorities are also withholding the name of the affected manufacturers for fear of litigation.
Condoms give you cancer!
I’m kidding. They probably don’t. But a team of German scientists have found that a carcinogenic substance is present in the majority of condoms that they tested. My guess is that follow-up studies will show that the cancer risk in condom use is small and certainly it’s less of a risk to your health than the one you take on having sex without a condom.
But my guess is we’ll be seeing this study again. How can the abstinence-only crowd resist it? I imagine they’ve been itching to tell kids that condoms cause cancer for a long, long time and now they have their chance. Long after the cancer risk of condoms is thoroughly discredited, it will be trotted out in abstinence-only classes, snuck onto government websites, repeated by Rush Limbaugh, and taught in churches. You know, like the "fact" that HIV passes through condoms or that abortions cause breast cancer.
Or maybe the anti-sex crowd will miss this one. We’ll see.he real danger of condoms and cancer
Bay Windows – Thursday, June 3, 2004
It has been a well-known fact for at least two decades among scientists, researchers, AIDS activists and the gay man on the street that condoms save lives.
Proper use of a condom remains the most effective way to prevent sexual transmission of the HIV virus – it’s such old news, it’s boring.
But there is the real threat that a new piece of research information about condoms could be taken out of context, and that it could be used by foes of condoms – both from within the circles of the religious conservatives, and from within the gay community – in an effort to undermine the message that condoms save lives.
The new information about condoms comes from a study just released by the Chemical and Veterinary Investigation Institute in Stuttgart, Germany. According to this study, most condoms contain trace elements of a substance called N-Nitrosamine.
Condom manufacturers use N-Nitrosamine to help make condoms more elastic. However, according to the study, when the rubber material of condoms comes in contact with body fluids and sweat, it can cause the condoms to release small amounts of N-Nitrosamine, and thus expose people to it.
Other studies have shown that N-Nitrosamine can be a cancer-causing agent, and many rubber products that contain it, such as baby pacifiers, have tight controls governing the manufacturing process and how much N-Nitrosamine a human may be exposed to from such products.
To date, there are no controls or standards for N-Nitrosamine with respect to condoms manufacturing.
The researchers from the Chemical and Veterinary Investigation Institute have called for condom makers to put in place manufacturing controls for the substance.
Even better, they have suggested that condom makers replace it altogether with other substances that can give condoms the same desired rubbery and elastic property. It’s possible to create elastic condoms without using N-Nitrosamine. A few condom makers already do. Of the 32 condom types tested in the German study, 29 used N-Nitrosamine, but three did not.
What would be disastrous, however, would be for people to misunderstand the German test results and leap to the conclusion that using condoms causes cancer.
Unfortunately, there are at least two groups that would be more than happy to twist the findings in a way that might make people think that condoms cause cancer, and to spread that misinformation in hopes of seeing the demise of the condom and its widespread use.
Conservatives, particularly religious-inspired ones who do not believe in contraceptives, will likely jump on this new information as "proof" that condoms are a "health risk" to the public, as some of them have long claimed.
This group of people has vociferously attacked condom use, especially as part of safer-sex education for young people. Contrary to mountains of scientific evidence, they have always maintained that condoms are not an effective tool for preventing pregnancy or the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV.
The German study will no doubt give them more ammunition for this attack on the safer-sex message.
But there is also another group that I fear might misunderstand, or even willfully manipulate the German study findings, and that includes some gay men.
One danger could be that some gay men simply misunderstand the findings. If incompletely or improperly reported, it isn’t too hard to see how some people might come to the conclusion that wearing condoms will give them cancer. And that could lead to fewer gay men using condoms, and thus more gay men putting themselves at the risk of contracting HIV.
And while it isn’t pleasant to contemplate, it is also possible that some gay men who don’t like using condoms in the first place could twist the findings of the study to convince their partners not to use protection.
It’s no secret that, for many gay men, condoms make getting an erection more difficult, or they make sex a little clumsier. To some guys, condoms are just a royal pain.
In my own personal experiences, I’ve known some guys who are into "barebacking" who gave every possible attempt and excuse and explanation to try to get me to engage in unsafe sex: They said they were HIV-negative, or they said they wouldn’t ejaculate in me, or they said condoms made them go soft, or they just said it felt better without it.
I can just hear someone adding to this litany of reasons not to use protection by quoting the mistruth that condoms are actually more dangerous than barebacking, because they cause cancer.
8 years, 11 months ago bhavyaKeymaster
this is the last thing we could have expected out of all the news we are hearing nowadays
8 years, 11 months ago anudevKeymaster
omg an alarm
8 years, 11 months ago SangitavijaiKeymaster
i go wid bhavya
8 years, 11 months ago YogaKeymaster
OMG…ena tan panradhu
2 months, 2 weeks ago Wendy MorganMember
Wow, very interesting and useful information. Honestly, I suspected that this might actually be true. The first time I found out about it was by reading reviews about medicines on iMedix.com. Honestly, now it’s not quite clear whether it is better to use other methods of contraception, or to continue using condoms …