Publications
Partners
Billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates said Thursday progress is being made on developing a "next-generation" ultra-thin, skin-like condom that could offer better sexual pleasure, help population control and be financed by first-world investors.
From my understanding this is not very responsive to what the international community has been calling for which is sustained investments and increased effort towards universal access to prevention, care, treatment and support, to ensure a comprehensive approach to addressing HIV. This includes significantly improving access to existing proven means. At the same time the world needs new prevention tools and technologies that will work with and complement existing prevention methods.
While I appreciate the Gates ‘philanthropy and philanthropic acts and principles I must say that after having read about their new venture of funding the development of a new ultra-thin condom, I started wondering if they are considerate of what the people want or if they are aware of what the actual issues are, or are they rather much about doing what they think is best for the community.
First and foremost one of the reasons why the condom is not working (as in people are not using) is not because of the texture. From what is available evidence indicates that condoms (both male and female) when used properly and consistently regardless of the texture they can reduce the risk of HIV transmission by more than 90%. However global access to male condoms is low and the female condom access is even lower. In March 2009 the Female Health Company (FHC) announced approval from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the 2nd-generation female condom known as the FC2. The FC2 was in response to some complaints or rather excuse as to why people did not use the female condom which was that it was too thick and reduced sexual pleasure. Five years later that still has not changed people still do not use the female condom and this is because it simply does not work for them, so what makes people think that "improving the male condom will change anything"? Condoms will not work for everyone even if they are as thin as the air. The development of an ultra-thin condom at this stage does not address the issues at hand which is access and adherence. I would rather this money was invested on increasing access and exploring new technologies which are under researched such as a vaccine or perhaps Prexposure Prophylaxis.
When interventions are made to curb HIV/AIDS there is a need to consider their relevance to key populations including all people living with HIV. Right now the possibility of a vaccine still remains a subject that has not been given that much of an attention. Remember that the issue is not how thin or thick the condom is but adherence and access, and condoms will never work effectively if they are not used consistently. In conclusion I wish to point out that this "new ultra-thin condom" is rather to say that we somehow did not get the condom right and need to improve it and not improve access which has been cited a impediment. But is this going to be sustainable and available to all? I can almost be sure that all the people that are looking forward to this new ultra-thin condom are those that are already using condoms (it’s like preaching to the converted). So there is a need to give as much attention to other prevention technologies and making the condom accessible rather than ultra-thin.
We need more prevention technology options that will cater for those the condom does not work for not an ultra-thin condom.
