51–60 of 143 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which in turn can readily be explained by the lack of a strong government.
That's a pretty facile response. Lots of African countries with "strong" governments still have tons and tons of violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The situation in Somalia can be readily explained by low incomes and decades of violence.
Which in turn can readily be explained by the lack of a strong government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The situation in Somalia can be readily explained by low incomes and decades of violence.
Which in turn can readily be explained by the lack of a strong government.
I can't find the link on the Gates Foundation site now (dead links on Google) but this is some press around it and mentions the 11 finalists:
http://theweek.com/articles/455793/meet-11-condoms-future-se...
So I guess better condoms are in the works already?
At a minimum you are looking at a couple of million in research, more if you want to go crazy with material science. Then you have the cost of testing, approval etc. After that you have marketing. It's a great project that will save many lives but the cost/risk analysis alone would put off any for profit organization.
The fact that the Gates Foundation is having to get involved is a sign that the market simply isn't going to solve this one.
(Government research probably won't deliver it either, at least in the US, due to the politics around contraception)
Orthogonal to the article: condoms are not one size fit all. A lot of people think they are, and this causes problems. Too small, and condoms break. Too large, and they slip off. Either way feels far less comfortable than with a properly fitting condom. This ultimately leads to less usage. Condom boxes have something called "nominal width" on the side. To fit properly, you or your partner need to take a precise measu…
Yeesh what an overwritten article. I plowed through it because this is relevant to my interests but man this could've been 3 paragraphs. I'll try and sum it up: -People don't use condoms mostly because they are uncomfortable -Current condoms are highly suboptimal for anal sex in particular -Materials other than latex are generally difficult to get to pass FDA tests, and it looks like there is some disagreeing science…
Or, to sum up even more succinctly: - Government regulations have stifled innovation, thereby making existing products less safe, less comfortable, and less used than they would be otherwise. In other words, nothing new.
The article implied this in tone, but in facts reported within did not make a slam dunk case. Latex is probably significantly safer in terms of blocking STD transmission, and it's also heavily understudied whether or not the sizing differences matter. I wouldn't say it's obvious government regulation is really the devil here.
A while back (2013?), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation offered financing for a "next generation" condom. I can't find the link on the Gates Foundation site now (dead links on Google) but this is some press around it and mentions the 11 finalists: http://theweek.com/articles/455793/meet-11-condoms-future-se... So I guess better condoms are in the works already?