Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!John.Smith@p0.f15.n114.z1.fidonet.org
From: John.Smith@p0.f15.n114.z1.fidonet.org (John Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Safety of condoms
Message-ID: <38573@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 3 Sep 90 10:27:45 GMT
Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU
Organization: FidoNet node 1:114/15.0 - St Joes Hospital, Phoenix AZ
Lines: 20
Approved: phil@wubios.wustl.edu
Note:	Copyright 1990 by Daniel R. Greening.  Permission granted for
Note:	non-commercial reproduction.
Archive-number: 2442

I always test condoms by inflating them, but this does not seem to be an 
effective way to detect microscopic pores that could allow the AIDS virus 
through.  I understand that condoms for human use are a highly effective 
barrier, but what about veterinary condoms?  They are not made for the same 
purpose, so are they unsafe as a means of protection?
 
Please understand that I am not attempting to be facetious, nor is my inquiry 
in regards to beastality.  I am not able to wear ordinary condoms.  I have not 
received answers from manufacturers of veterinary condoms.  
 
My apologies for using an alias against network rules, but please understand 
my need for privacy.   This message is being posted on a bulletin board 
outside of my local area.
 
--- Opus-CBCS 1.13
 * Origin: St. Joseph's Medical Ctr BBS (602) 235-9653 (1:114/15.0)
 
--  
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!15.0!John.Smith
Internet: John.Smith@p0.f15.n114.z1.fidonet.org