'Experiences of Condom Fit and Feel Among African-American Men Who Have Sex With Men'

(Reworded, below.) (I often go back and change things in my attempts to "get it right" and correct errors. I'm not infallible like the Pope or George Bush.)

"Experiences of Condom Fit and Feel Among African-American Men Who Have Sex With Men"

I find the concept of "MSM" odd (to me it connotes an almost casual choice). It's as if "homosexuals" and "bisexuals" don't really exist, in this case in the African-American culture. * (Just as they don't exist in Iran.) From The Body:

African-American men who have sex with men (MSM) are a particularly high-risk group for HIV and other STDs in the United States. The researchers conducted the current study "to offer an empirical understanding of characteristics associated with the fit and feel of condoms" among this population.

Data were collected from 178 adult African-American MSM attending a community event in Atlanta. Most participants reported that condoms generally fit properly and felt comfortable. However, a substantial number reported problems, including: condoms felt too tight (21 percent); condoms felt too short (18 percent); condoms felt too loose (10 percent); condoms felt too long (7 percent).

Significant associations were found between men's reports of condom slippage and breakage and their perceptions of condoms' fit and feel. These perceptions were also related to the men's reports of seeking condoms for size-specific properties.

"The fit and feel issues that men in this sample identified may be among those that contribute to their likelihood of using, or not using, condoms consistently and correctly," the authors concluded. "A better understanding of these factors will be beneficial to both condom manufacturers and sexual health professionals who share a common goal of increasing consistent and correct condom use and reducing the incidence of HIV and other [STDs] among this and other communities."

(Photo not from The Body. Click to enlarge.)

_______________
* But believe me, they do.

TGISa

Today I worked longer than I normally would on a weekday and there was no let-up, but that was OK. Made some extra money. Though I didn't ask for it, they bought me a veggie wrap with a field green salad, hummus and toasted pita bread wedges for dipping. I had brought my own food but ended up eating the thing anyway--I got hungry and it was sitting right there in front of me. Not impressed with the wrap but the hummus was excellent and the salad tasty. (I'd have ordered a burger or anything but a veggie wrap if they'd have asked me what I wanted.) They got the food from the Hotel Intercontinental, which is part of the complex. (BTW, I was working for, let's call him, Mr. Fiordiligi.) I get along well with him, he likes my work, and I was there pretty much at his request, even though I'd balked at arriving at 9. He was OK with my showing up at 10. I had to take the bus since I don't much trust the truck these days, and the express bus doesn't run on the weekends. (I plan on having the truck serviced this Friday, which I'm taking off.) Fiordiligi was very gracious today.

Here's a fascinating article ("Darwin's Surprise" by Michael Specter) in the Dec. 3 New Yorker about retroviruses in our genetic make-up and the role they could play in eradicating AIDS:

It takes less than two per cent of our genome to create all the proteins necessary for us to live. Eight per cent, however, is composed of broken and disabled retroviruses, which, millions of years ago, managed to embed themselves in the DNA of our ancestors. They are called endogenous retroviruses, because once they infect the DNA of a species they become part of that species. . . .

[N]othing provides more convincing evidence for the “theory” of evolution than the viruses contained within our DNA. Until recently, the earliest available information about the history and the course of human diseases, like smallpox and typhus, came from mummies no more than four thousand years old. Evolution cannot be measured in a time span that short. Endogenous retroviruses provide a trail of molecular bread crumbs leading millions of years into the past. . . .

There are several possible ways to interpret the data, but the one favored by the researchers is that because humans developed an effective defense against one virus, PtERV, at about the time we split off from the chimps, five million years ago, we were left vulnerable to a new one, H.I.V. “If we can develop a drug that acts the same way the monkey version of this protein acts—so that it recognizes H.I.V. and neutralizes it—we could have a very effective therapy,’’ Malik said. Both he and Emerman stressed that this day will not come soon. “First, we have to establish what part of TRIM5a is actually responsible for protecting monkeys against H.I.V.,” Malik said. “Then we would have to try and make it as a drug”—and one that the human body won’t reject. “The challenge is to find out how little you can change the human version and still make it effective against H.I.V." . . .