I've always wondered about how they calculated that.
If they just taught people how to use a condom and then sent them off to their merry romps, and then checked how many of them got pregnant after a few months, then the statistic is highly suspicious - after all, it could just be from misuse (put it on the wrong way, then remembered how to use a condom and put it on the right way) or just omitting to use them (and then lying about it).
In this case, that would mean that the 2% statistic just indicates that 2% of the participants were not capable or willing to use a condom.
If that's not the way they did it - then how did they do it? Because beyond having every participant followed around by a man with a clipboard, I don't see any ways to reduce the chance of misuse or lying...
Nope, the 2% is considering 'perfect use'. Now, if that involves lying (I promise! I was using a condom, and perfectly!) I can't know, but I think statistics usually involve some corrections for these cases.
The failure rate for 'typical use' (which always involves too much cases) is 15%. These statistics come from wikipedia [1], but I knew some rough numbers from sexual education at my school and were around that. For casual sex, yes, condom is the way to go (both for birth control and STDs).
That's a big bummer, because that usually means involving hormone birth control methods in stable relationships, and I hate them and the effect that can have on my partner.
I am looking forward to see the advances in male contraception [2]. But I am afraid it will be something for the next generation.
I would not be surprised is some of the issue was simply continuing after the first orgasm. Ideally, you should dry yourself and then reapply, but I don't think that happens add that much.
Yeah, the failure rate is due to misuse, but that still matters.
Alcohol has an extremely low risk of death (overdose), but alcohol misuse (driving, etc) is much mor common, and that is critically important when assessing the risk.
If they just taught people how to use a condom and then sent them off to their merry romps, and then checked how many of them got pregnant after a few months, then the statistic is highly suspicious - after all, it could just be from misuse (put it on the wrong way, then remembered how to use a condom and put it on the right way) or just omitting to use them (and then lying about it).
In this case, that would mean that the 2% statistic just indicates that 2% of the participants were not capable or willing to use a condom.
If that's not the way they did it - then how did they do it? Because beyond having every participant followed around by a man with a clipboard, I don't see any ways to reduce the chance of misuse or lying...