The Widespread Distribution of Condoms in Africa is in Africans' Best Interests

Note argument 1 has appeared to have been dropped by Con. "I am not advocating complete removal of condoms from all anti-HIV programs. I am instead advocating that condoms be focused on high-risk groups such as truckers and prostitutes." Except that the general population in Africa is the high risk category. Unlike say Thailand where prostitution is more normalised and widespread of an industry - the issue of HIV transmission is largest in non sex trade individuals. Especially since you argue they engage in high risk activity (can't have it both ways). "For the general population, however, widespread condom distribution has not been shown to be an effective way to fight AIDS because condoms cause risk compensation" Your links only provide at best, dubious contentions for the effect of condom use in Africa. Simply stating a model hypothesis is not nearly evidence for it. Especially when you run the risk of questionable cause fallacies. Use of condoms are by definition *less* less risky sex behaviour. Errors in individual behaviour comes from either individual misuse or non use of condoms. See R1 where I showed that discordant couples not only don't engage in risk behaviour par course of long term condom use, but that it is specifically condom use that prevents the transmission to the non infected partner. Likewise attributing HIV rates as a problem *with* condoms is not supported by your links at all. The issue is with education and individual behaviour, not the condoms. Condoms are not 'useless' in general populations - individual behaviour management is the problem. Indeed if we were to discard all objects that could be misused it would make action near impossible. Again, as per R1, condom distribution rarely occurs in a vacuum of information. This fact alone confounds any loose data you have found - not to mention it ignores factors such as discrepancies between condom availability versus population sizes (i.e. your argument presumes a perfect world scenario that is false). Confounds exist for you population % growth of cases too - large numbers of HIV positive births occur for example. Not to mention your source itself ([3]) advocates continued condom usage in the general population. "Conclusions: Recommendations include more condom promotion for groups at high risk more rigorous measurement of the impact of condom promotion, and more research on how best to integrate condom promotion with other prevention strategies." http://www.kaisernetwork.org... http://www.unaids.org... "Because concurrent partners is the primary reason that Africa has a disproportionately large AIDS epidemic, it only makes sense that programs should focus on reducing concurrency." Such education is already in place and has been since the 80s. Again, risk management programs include condom distribution along side educational programs such as practicing monogamy. Removing condoms simply creates a new variable for transmission that education itself cannot cover - namely transmission reduction during sex (the alternative if we are to take your premises to their full conclusion is advocating a ban on sex from HIV positive individuals and even that presumes foreknowledge of infection). Con's last argument is about the ABC program in Uganda. As already noted in R1. There is no consistent evidence for abstinence as a factor in the success for the program though it is a facet of the ABC program. His claim of a more recent study is false. The article linked is not an study, it is an at best an essay or review of data (not even a meta analysis). It is either un-submitted or not destined to be submitted for peer review (it's from a graduate online textbook). There reference used within to support abstinence predates my own, making that claim void as well. Con has ignored the wealth of data against abstinence programs as evidenced in the U.S. and his claim of effectives in Uganda via ABC unfounded (opinion pieces and afore mentioned paper) - it relates to later onset of first sexual activity (also promoted *alongside* condom usage not only in ABC but most other sexual health programs running in Africa). Not, maintaining abstinence as a viable strategy long term strategy - which is supported by data in Africa and as also noted in R1 other regions. Con continues to make the error and thus tries to force the argument, that condom promotion exists in vacuum and thus is attributable to all faults. This is simply not the case at all. http://www.usaid.gov... "Almost all of my opponent's sources were about how effective condoms are at preventing HIV transmission between individual couples, not within populations" Individuals have sex with the population? No. Two people having sex won't spread HIV but it will spread through a population? No.