[HaZeust]

>Condoms are less effective at HIV prevention

lol what

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/condoms.html "condoms are highly effective in preventing HIV"

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9141163/ 1997, "reexamination of HIV seroconversion studies suggests that condoms are 90 to 95% effective when used consistently"

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/prevention/condoms.html "Most condoms are effective in preventing HIV and certain other STIs"

[astura]

Nobody said condoms were not effective, only that PrEP is MORE effective than condoms, which appears to be true.

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/prep/index.html

>PrEP reduces the risk of getting HIV from sex by about 99%.

Last I checked 99 was greater than 95.

[HaZeust]

He didn't say "less effective than PrEP", he said "less effective", and PrEP wasn't the hereditary context of his statement.

[iknowstuff]

Yes it was. The person I responded to is asking why the person considering switching to injectable PrEP doesn't “just use condoms”

[astura]

You need to improve your reading comprehension.

[iknowstuff]

What do you need me to explain to you?

[HaZeust]

I want you to explain how condoms are less effective at preventing HIV transmission.

[iknowstuff]

They are indeed less effective than PrEP which is what the entire comment chain is about.