Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Condoms cause life-threatening anaphylaxis"
Allergic Reactions Central ^

Posted on 05/14/2005 3:22:56 PM PDT by David Lane

Latex

Natural rubber latex (NRL) has emerged over the last decade as an increasingly common trigger for anaphylaxis-producing allergies. It is found in a wide range of manufactured goods, including an estimated 40,000 common household items. Latex allergies now affect an estimated 1% to 6% of the U.S. population and the reasons for the increase in incidence can be attributed to biohazard precautions and manufacturing changes.1-3

Latex allergy is an allergic sensitivity to the proteins in NRL that often worsens with each exposure, a phenomenon known as allergic sensitization. Allergic reactions to latex can range from moderate skin irritations to life-threatening anaphylaxis.

You may be interested in learning more about latex allergies including information on variations in severity, who is at risk, and prevention and treatment.

Reasons for Increased Incidence

Prior to the 1980s, reactions to latex were virtually unknown in the United States. Now, recent estimates put the incidence of latex sensitivity or allergy among the general U.S. population at between 1% and 6%, or up to 16 million people.1-3

Reasons for the increase in latex allergy incidence include:

Biohazard precautions
It is commonly acknowledged that the sudden, large-scale increase in latex glove use by health care workers since the 1980s lies at the heart of the growing problem of latex allergy. As health care workers sought to protect themselves from AIDS and other blood-borne diseases, latex glove use became virtually universal in hospitals and other medical and dental facilities. Patients, and especially health care workers, were exposed to more latex than ever before and many have become sensitized to it.

Manufacturing changes
To keep up with increased demand, manufacturers sped up their processes and resorted to lower quality latex, both of which have resulted in latex products with higher levels of the protein that can trigger allergic reactions.

Definition

Latex allergy is an allergic sensitivity to the proteins in natural rubber latex (NRL) that often worsens with each exposure and at its most severe can result in deadly anaphylaxis. Unlike synthetic latex, which rarely causes allergic reactions, NRL comes from the milky sap of rubber trees. Using various processing techniques, NRL is used alone or in combination with other materials to make thousands of products including:

Dipped latex products are the biggest culprits in triggering allergic reactions, including:

GET YOUR FREE INFO KIT

Allergic Sensitization

Sensitization occurs when exposure to latex proteins causes the body's immune system to develop antibodies to these proteins. Because the body perceives the latex protein as a threatening foreign substance, it prepares to launch a defense against it in future encounters using the antibodies it has created. Therefore, people may have been sensitized to latex without yet showing external allergic symptoms. They are, however, at risk of becoming increasingly sensitized and eventually symptomatic if exposure to latex continues.

Sensitization refers to an increasingly strong allergic reaction to the same amount of allergen over time.

Antibodies are proteins that help the body to identify specific foreign invaders to the body, such as latex and other allergens.

Reactions to Latex

Because latex can cause local skin irritation, or dermatitis, as well as more severe allergic reactions, it is important to distinguish between these so that symptoms of potentially fatal allergic reactions are recognized and treated, and proper precautions against future reactions are taken.

Dermatitis
Two types of skin irritations, or dermatitis, are common among frequent users of latex products, particularly glove-wearing health care workers:

While annoying, dermatitis reactions are not dangerous per se, nor necessarily directly related to latex. There can, however, be progression from dermatitis to latex allergy. Severe skin irritation can make a person more susceptible to developing an allergic hypersensitivity to latex because the skin no longer protects more sensitive internal tissues of the body, which are more vulnerable to sensitization.

Latex allergy (immediate hypersensitivity)
True latex allergy occurs when the body's immune system becomes sensitized to latex proteins, usually over the course of repeated exposure. As a result of sensitization, the immune system overreacts to latex as a hostile intruder.

Allergic symptoms range from irritating to life threatening, becoming progressively worse with repeated exposure. Allergic symptoms include the following, and may occur singly or in combination:

Full-blown anaphylaxis, which can include any of the above, can cause death through suffocation or a severe drop in blood pressure.

Asthma is a condition in which the airways narrow due to an allergic hypersensitivity.

Rhinoconjunctivitis is an allergic condition common in children during the pollen season that is characterized by sneezing, runny nose, and nasal congestion.

Since it's impossible to predict when an allergic reaction might escalate into deadly anaphylaxis, and because it can take only minutes to do so, it's important to take even seemingly mild allergic reactions seriously. Thus, those who have experienced allergic symptoms in response to latex should avoid further contact with it and consult their physicians about carrying self-injectable epinephrine with them for anaphylactic emergencies.

References

  1. Ownby DR, Ownby HE, et al. The prevalence of anti-latex IgE antibodies in 1000 volunteer blood donors. J Allergy Clinl Immunol. 1996;97:1188-1192.
     
  2. Kelly KJ, Sussman G, Fink JN. Stop the sensitization. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1996;98:857-858.
     
  3. Arellano R, Bradley J, Sussman G. Prevalence of latex sensitization among hospital physicians occupationally exposed to latex gloves. Anesthesiology. 1992;77:905-908.


TOPICS: Education; Health/Medicine; Miscellaneous; Reference
KEYWORDS: aids; allergies; condoms; health; hiv; latex; safesex; sex; stds
THE FDA SAYS ONLY 1% OF LATEX DEATHS ARE REPORTED

Delayed contact dermatitis from chemicals in rubber has been recognized since the 1930s.4 But except for rare early reports, clinicians did not appreciate systemic allergic reactions to latex proteins until 1979, when case reports began to appear in Europe. 5

Latex allergy erupted in the United States shortly after the Centers for Disease Control introduced universal precautions in 1987. By late 1992, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) received 1133 reports of serious allergic reactions and anaphylaxis occurring to patients and health care staff associated with 30 classes of latex medical devices. There were 15 patient deaths associated with latex barium enema catheters.5,6

The FDA estimated that the reports represented only 1% of actual occurrences.6

Today, researchers hypothesize that the latex allergy outbreak is the result of multiple factors including deficiencies in manufacturing processes, increased latex exposure, hand care practices, immunological cross reactivity, and changes in latex agricultural practices.1,7,8, 45

Latex allergy affects between 8%-12% of workers in all health disciplines. Latex allergy also affects up to 51% of children with spina bifida, and approximately 1% of the general population.

http://www.nursingworld.org/readroom/position/workplac/wklatex.htm

1 posted on 05/14/2005 3:22:56 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: David Lane
Well of course! Just remember that if you don't start by demanding ten million nobody'll take you seriously.
2 posted on 05/14/2005 3:31:24 PM PDT by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

Prophylactic anaphylaxis.. who knew?


3 posted on 05/14/2005 3:32:03 PM PDT by Darksheare (There is a flaw in my surreality, it's totally unrealistic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: David Lane
Someone should send this to Rush then he could do one of his condom updates..."Up Up and away in my beautiful balloon..."
4 posted on 05/14/2005 3:34:35 PM PDT by CzarNicky (The problem with bad ideas is that they seemed like good ideas at the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

Latex anaphylaxis ping.

And you thought "Dressed to Kill" was only a comment on your looks. :)



5 posted on 05/14/2005 3:37:04 PM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (WWJD - We Want Jack Daniels!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

"If you don't trust the (censored), why are you (censored) the (censored)" - Sam Kinison.


6 posted on 05/14/2005 3:39:42 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan (Fire Stabenow in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim
Prophylactic anaphylaxis

Gehsundheit.


7 posted on 05/14/2005 3:49:41 PM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

Condoms Cause Infertility in Men
September 2001
WHAT IS MALE INFERTILITY?

Infertility is the failure of a couple to become pregnant after one year of regular, unprotected intercourse. In both men and women the fertility process is complex, and, in many cases, infertility is caused by a combination of problems in both partners that conspire to prevent conception.

About 10% to 15% of couples experience some form of infertility, and, in approximately 40% of these cases, male infertility is the major factor. Another 40% of infertility problems are caused by abnormalities of the woman's reproductive system, and the remaining 20% involve couples who both suffer reproductive difficulties.
Infertility affects one in 25 American men.

More than 90% of male infertility cases are due to low sperm counts, poor sperm quality, or both. Whether sperm counts are declining overall in industrialized countries is a controversial issue.

Declining Male Fertility?

Although there have been reports of declining male fertility in the US and in Europe, several recent studies have not found a drop in sperm counts over the past 50 years. A large 2000 study based in Los Angeles, for example, found virtually no change in sperm count from a study conducted in the 1950s. Similarly, a Danish study showed no change in sperm quality in men born between 1950 and 1970.

Some experts suggest that the decline observed in other studies may not have taken into consideration normal sperm fluctuations that can occur from year to year and from season to season. Sperm counts also appear to differ by region.

Temperature and climate, then, may play some role in the differences seen from country to country and from year to year. In one study, Finland had the highest measured sperm count in the world, while Britain's was low. (It should be noted that a more recent study has reported a significant decline in sperm count in Finnish men between 1981 and 1991.) In another study, the sperm count in New York City was much higher than that in Los Angeles.

Note: Many studies are limited, and most rely on data from sperm banks, which also may not reflect the male population as a whole.

CAUSES
Environmental Assaults

Over exposure to environmental assaults (toxins, chemicals, infections) can reduce sperm count either by direct effects on testicular function or on the hormone systems, although the extent of the effect and specific environmental assaults involved are often controversial.

Exposure to Chemicals. In most cases, avoiding toxic environments can restore sperm count.

* Pesticides with estrogen-like effects have the strongest evidence for sperm reduction.
Overexposure to estrogen reduces the number of Sertoli cells (the cells necessary for the initial development of sperm). Such pesticides include DDT, aldrin, dieldrin, PCPs, dioxins, and furans. One 1999 study of couples in a fertility clinic reported that when men had a history of moderate or high on-the-job exposure to pesticides their fertility rates were lower than men without such exposures. Although tests of single chemicals containing estrogen have reported little dangers, other studies indicate that exposure to more than one of these chemicals may be very harmful.

* Phthalates are chemicals used to soften plastics. Most are harmless, but the most commonly-used one, called DEHP, may warrant concern, animals exposed to DEHP had lower than normal sperm counts. In addition, there is some concern that exposure in pregnant women may affect their children.

* Other chemicals are under investigation. In one 2000 study, workers in a rubber factory who were chronically exposed to hydrocarbons (ethylbenzene, *benzene, *toluene, and *xylene) had lower than average sperm count and sperm qualities. These are used in MASSIVE QUANTITIES IN CONDOM MANUFACTURE.

Another 1999 study suggested that men whose work exposes them to aromatic solvents used in paints, varnishes, glues, and metal degreasers and other products may be at risk of reduced fertility. Still, not all major work has confirmed the effects of these chemicals and evidence showing any significant effect is weak.

In addition to the effect on fertility, some researchers believe overexposure to chemicals may also contribute to testicular cancers. In fact, a 2000 study concluded that there was a link between sperm abnormalities and testicular cancer.

Among the study participants, men in couples with fertility problems were more likely to develop testicular cancer. In addition, low semen concentration, poor sperm motility, and abnormal sperm morphology were all associated with increased risk for testicular cancer.

* Used in condom manufacture


8 posted on 05/14/2005 3:58:43 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
Prophylactic anaphylaxis

LOL! But...au contraire...it is anaphylactic prophylaxis. Is it anaphylaxis induced as a preventative, or a preventative that induces anaphylaxis?

9 posted on 05/14/2005 4:25:50 PM PDT by TheGeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TheGeezer

It's a swell problem.

*snerk*

Good question though.
Sometimes wondered if the allergic reaction is due to the latex, latex machioning oils/chemicals, or the ninox-9 on the stuff.


10 posted on 05/14/2005 4:28:44 PM PDT by Darksheare (There is a flaw in my surreality, it's totally unrealistic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
Image hosted by Photobucket.com

:)

11 posted on 05/14/2005 4:36:30 PM PDT by tiredoflaundry ("Harry Reid in stripes, I kinda like that image." -Tagline courtesy of DFU. Thanks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tiredoflaundry

I tried!


12 posted on 05/14/2005 4:37:13 PM PDT by Darksheare (There is a flaw in my surreality, it's totally unrealistic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

lol!


13 posted on 05/14/2005 4:37:45 PM PDT by tiredoflaundry ("Harry Reid in stripes, I kinda like that image." -Tagline courtesy of DFU. Thanks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
It's a swell problem.

[LOL! Alas, I can't think of a witty response. So I'll fake the high road...]

I can't respond, lest I take these exchanges into the gutter.

14 posted on 05/14/2005 4:44:53 PM PDT by TheGeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tiredoflaundry

It just brings up all kinds of horrible jokes.



But what's with the allergic reactions?
Is it truly an allergy to the latex, or is it an allergy to something on the latex like machining oils or the spermacide?
*shrugs*

I just know I don't want to be the guy to find out!


15 posted on 05/14/2005 4:53:35 PM PDT by Darksheare (There is a flaw in my surreality, it's totally unrealistic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TheGeezer

"The gutter was full, so I had to invent a new one."


Easy to joke about while nervous.
Don't want to be the next guy to discover that he's allergic to them.


16 posted on 05/14/2005 4:54:34 PM PDT by Darksheare (There is a flaw in my surreality, it's totally unrealistic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

"Sometimes wondered if the allergic reaction is due to the latex, latex machioning oils/chemicals, or the ninox-9 on the stuff.'

Actually it is ALL the above. Condoms are without doubt THE MOST TOXIC PRODUCT on the market today.

N9 - Proven to cause birth defects and increase so called 'AIDS' (immune suppression).

Talc - FDA carcinogen

Benzene - FDA listed carcinogen

Toluene - FDA listed carcinogen

Silicone - FDA listed carcinogen

Trimethylsiloxy condom lubricant - Known carcinogen

TETRAMETHYLTHIURAM DISULFIDE - FDA listed teratogen (causes birth defects)

N-Nitrosamine - Possibly the most carcinogenic substance known to man.

Latex proteins - Can cause type IV deaths

N-Cyclohexyl - Serious effects


and this is only the tip of the iceberg.


CONDOMS KILL

CONDOMS CAUSE

Birth defects
Cancers
Infertility
Immune Suppression (AIDS)
Impotence
and hundreds of lesser conditions.


WITH A GLOVE, IT'S NOT LOVE!


http://groups.msn.com/LIDS-Latexallergiesandthedangersofcondoms





17 posted on 05/14/2005 4:54:45 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

Study Says Condoms Contain Cancer-Causing Substance

Reuters ^ | Fri May 28,12:09 PM ET

BERLIN (Reuters) - Most condoms contain a cancer-causing chemical and their manufacture should be subject to greater quality control, a German scientific research institute said Friday.

The Chemical and Veterinary Investigation Institute in Stuttgart, Germany, said it found the carcinogen N-Nitrosamine present in 29 of 32 types of condoms it tested in simulated conditions.

"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 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, the study said.


18 posted on 05/14/2005 4:56:55 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

Yowch.

Answer choice 'D'.. yowzer.


19 posted on 05/14/2005 4:59:49 PM PDT by Darksheare (There is a flaw in my surreality, it's totally unrealistic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

I guess this means sheep gut condoms are going to make a come back.


20 posted on 05/14/2005 5:12:16 PM PDT by beaver fever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Choice 'D' was Toluene.

A good choice. Used instead of Benzene during the vulcanization process of NLR.

" When Maltoni and his colleagues exposed rats to toluene, the occurrence of malignant tumors jumped from a 24.5 percent baseline rate to 68.8 percent. Xylene exposure resulted in a 56.4 percent incidence of malignant tumors."


COPYRIGHT 1985 Science Service, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group


21 posted on 05/14/2005 5:16:39 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: beaver fever

"I guess this means sheep gut condoms are going to make a come back."

Did you mean cum back?


22 posted on 05/14/2005 5:17:27 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

LOL!
Ouch.


23 posted on 05/14/2005 5:19:19 PM PDT by Darksheare (There is a flaw in my surreality, it's totally unrealistic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

I always thought it ironic to use sheep intestine as a barrier between you and another human being to prevent disease and human conception.

If I was a conspiracy theorist I would suspect a plot by sheep to eliminate man and rule the world.


24 posted on 05/14/2005 5:42:03 PM PDT by beaver fever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: beaver fever

" I would suspect a plot by sheep to eliminate man"

Sheep DO rule the world.


25 posted on 05/14/2005 5:45:45 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

Common Name: TOLUENE
CAS Number: 108-88-3
DOT Number: UN 1294



HAZARD SUMMARY
* Toluene can affect you when breathed in and by passing through your skin.

* Toluene should be handled as a TERATOGEN--WITH
EXTREME CAUTION.(Ed. A teratogen causes birth defects)

* It may damage the developing fetus.

* Contact can irritate the skin and eyes.

* Breathing Toluene can irritate the nose and throat causing coughing and wheezing.

* Exposure to Toluene can affect the nervous system causing trouble concentrating, headaches and slowed reflexes.

Higher levels can cause you to feel dizzy, lightheaded, and to pass out. Death may occur.

* Prolonged contact can cause drying of the skin and a skin rash.

* Repeated Toluene exposure may cause liver, kidney and brain damage.

* Toluene is a FLAMMABLE LIQUID and a FIRE
HAZARD.


26 posted on 05/14/2005 5:59:59 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

...and the liberal/gay media still dears to tell us condoms are safe.

If condoms are safe so is the H-Bomb.


27 posted on 05/14/2005 6:03:21 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

...and the liberal/gay media still dares to tell us condoms are safe.

If condoms are safe so is the H-Bomb.

(sorry about typo)


28 posted on 05/14/2005 6:04:16 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: David Lane; martin_fierro
WHAT IS MALE INFERTILITY?

The woman's problem!

Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week...

31 posted on 05/14/2005 6:13:49 PM PDT by Dont Mention the War (Proud Member of the WPPFF Death Cult - We're coming after YOU next!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
Impotence. P.S. This is what latex allergy can look like: -
32 posted on 05/14/2005 6:20:29 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

More than 90% of male infertility cases are due to low sperm counts, poor sperm quality, or both.

The man need not be impotent but the two usually go together to some degree.


33 posted on 05/14/2005 6:47:01 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: David Lane
It looks like you've spent more time researching this than anyone else I know.

What are your recommendations?

34 posted on 05/14/2005 6:51:51 PM PDT by Scenic Sounds (Sí, estamos libres sonreír otra vez - ahora y siempre.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds

Dear Scenic,

Having been involved in latex research I do have a little knowledge of the subject.

All I can really tell you is don't use condoms. THAT IS AN ABSOLUTE.

For birth control the pill is still the best option by far. Not without some problems but far safer than NLR or synthetic rubber condoms.

For std protection, not using condoms will have no effect whatsoever, as their barrier protection is so slight. Three studies have shown they actually increase what is called "AIDS' (immune suppression).

This is not so surprising as many components have immune suppressant qualities such as Benzene, Silicone and N9.

I wish I could offer the perfect solution but this is not a perfect World.


Best wishes,


David


35 posted on 05/14/2005 7:41:47 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

Hm, so you're not against birth control, just against condoms?


36 posted on 05/14/2005 8:11:10 PM PDT by k2blader ('Lost' ping list - Please FReepmail me if you want on/off. :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: k2blader

Correct. I'm against cancer and birth defects. No other agenda.


37 posted on 05/14/2005 8:44:26 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: David Lane
Interesting info...never thought out the dangers of the chemical composition of condoms before this post, but based on the smell, this makes complete sense. Glad my wife and I never made regular use of them (three kids in 17 years is a pretty good hit/miss ratio in my book). Regardless, good f'ing luck finding an MSM audience for this reality check...<sarcasm off.
38 posted on 05/15/2005 3:43:04 PM PDT by Amalie (FREEDOM had NEVER been another word for nothing left to lose...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Amalie

Dear Amalie,

Thanks for the post. You are so right about getting the message over using the MSM.

It is so sad that health has become a political issue.

The dangers of latex are well known to the entire medical community (and not in dispute by the FDA or OSHA) and yet the subject is considered politically incorrect by the mass media.

Germs, diseases and toxins, however, don't seen too concerned with being politically correct and so the needless suffering goes on and on.

The most shocking thing is the FDA have stated that under 1% of latex deaths are even reported and yet have done NOTHING to correct this. Condoms contain several FDA listed carcinogens and teratogens and yet no warning is put on the label. This is a breach of California (and other States law).

This is CRIMINAL in the strictest sense of the term.

Being politically correct is the new liberal name for communist style censorship.

I'm not politically correct and never will be.

I just try to be honest.


Warmest regards,

David Lane


39 posted on 05/15/2005 9:30:26 PM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

Just as a quick follow-up - with latex so commonplace today in all sorts of the health-related products, is there any reasonable alternative to it in terms of health safety/prevention?


40 posted on 05/16/2005 5:07:04 AM PDT by Amalie (FREEDOM had NEVER been another word for nothing left to lose...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

Looks like a patriotic allergy.


41 posted on 05/16/2005 5:10:26 AM PDT by verity (A mindset is an antidote to logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Amalie

No barrier contraceptives are safe. All contain too many toxins.

The good news is that as none are any real protection in the first case, little is lost by not using them.

I still feel the pill is still the best dispite some drawbacks health wise.


Best wishes,


David


42 posted on 05/17/2005 9:49:49 AM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: verity

"Looks like a patriotic allergy'

You have a point there.


43 posted on 05/17/2005 9:50:55 AM PDT by David Lane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: David Lane

lol


44 posted on 05/17/2005 9:55:16 AM PDT by verity (A mindset is an antidote to logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson