I assume almost every Filipino of voting age is now aware of the ongoing scuffle between the Roman Catholic Hierarchy and the Department of Health headed by the newly appointed Esperanza Cabral. Secretary Cabral began distributing condoms for the public to the ire of our moral guardians. The two opposite poles of the debate now are either you are a pro-condom who believes that condom can readily prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS or unabated pregnancies, or an anti-condom who believes that condom in the first place should never be part of the preventive menu. For the sake of logic and reason, let’s pause for a while and listen to AIDS expert Edward Green, a Senior Research Scientist at Harvard School of Public Health. I believe he got something reasonable aside from the fiery casts of moral ideologies around. Here’s a quote from his article from The Washington Post:
“In 2003, Norman Hearst and Sanny Chen of the University of California conducted a condom effectiveness study for the United Nations’ AIDS program and found no evidence of condoms working as a primary HIV-prevention measure in Africa. UNAIDS quietly disowned the study. (The authors eventually managed to publish their findings in the quarterly Studies in Family Planning.) Since then, major articles in other peer-reviewed journals such as the Lancet, Science and BMJ have confirmed that condoms have not worked as a primary intervention in the population-wide epidemics of Africa. In a 2008 article in Science called “Reassessing HIV Prevention” 10 AIDS experts concluded that “consistent condom use has not reached a sufficiently high level, even after many years of widespread and often aggressive promotion, to produce a measurable slowing of new infections in the generalized epidemics of Sub-Saharan Africa.”