Editing Condom (section)

=== Materials ===

==== Natural latex ====
[[File:Condom unrolled durex.jpg|thumb|375px|An unrolled latex condom]]

Latex has outstanding elastic properties: Its [[tensile strength]] exceeds 30&nbsp;MPa, and latex condoms may be stretched in excess of 800% before breaking.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Relationship of condom strength to failure during use |journal=PIACT Prod News |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=1–2 |year=1980 |pmid=12264044 |author1=Program for the Introduction and Adaptation of Contraceptive Technology PIACT}}</ref> In 1990 the [[International Organization for Standardization|ISO]] set standards for condom production (ISO 4074, Natural latex rubber condoms), and the [[European Union|EU]] followed suit with its [[European Committee for Standardization|CEN]] standard (Directive 93/42/EEC concerning medical devices). Every latex condom is tested for holes with an electric current. If the condom passes, it is rolled and packaged. In addition, a portion of each batch of condoms is subject to water leak and air burst testing.<ref name="badnews">{{cite journal |last=Nordenberg |first=Tamar |title=Condoms: Barriers to Bad News |journal=[[FDA Consumer]] |date=March–April 1998 |volume=32 |issue=2 |pages=22–5 |pmid=9532952 |url=https://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/HIVandAIDSActivities/ucm126370.htm |access-date=7 June 2007 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100308051921/https://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ByAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/HIVandAIDSActivities/ucm126370.htm |archive-date=8 March 2010}}</ref>

While the advantages of latex have made it the most popular condom material, it does have some drawbacks. Latex condoms are damaged when used with oil-based substances as [[Personal lubricant|lubricants]], such as [[petroleum jelly]], [[cooking oil]], [[baby oil]], [[mineral oil]], [[skin lotion]]s, [[Sunscreen|suntan lotions]], [[cold cream]]s, [[butter]] or [[margarine]].<ref>[http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/42331/1/1885960018_eng.pdf Essentials of Contraceptive Technology > Chapter 11 Condoms] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170808195319/http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/42331/1/1885960018_eng.pdf |date=8 August 2017 }} From the Knowledge for Health Project, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Retrieved July 2010.</ref> Contact with oil makes latex condoms more likely to break or slip off due to loss of elasticity caused by the oils.<ref name="fhi3">{{cite journal |last=Spruyt |first=Alan B |title=Chapter 3: User Behaviors and Characteristics Related to Condom Failure |journal=The Latex Condom: Recent Advances, Future Directions |url=http://www.fhi.org/en/RH/Pubs/booksReports/latexcondom/behavcharac.htm |year=1998 |access-date=8 April 2007 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927122314/http://www.fhi.org/en/RH/Pubs/booksReports/latexcondom/behavcharac.htm |archive-date=27 September 2011}}</ref> Additionally, [[latex allergy]] precludes use of latex condoms and is one of the principal reasons for the use of other materials. In May 2009, the U.S. [[Food and Drug Administration]] (FDA) granted approval for the production of condoms composed of [[Vytex]],<ref>{{cite press release |title=FDA Clearance for Envy Natural Rubber Latex Condom Made with Vytex NRL |publisher=Vystar |date=6 May 2009 |url=http://www.vytex.com/BizDocs/R-EnvyFDA_Clearance.pdf |access-date=26 August 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111007172424/http://www.vytex.com/BizDocs/R-EnvyFDA_Clearance.pdf |archive-date=7 October 2011}}</ref> latex that has been treated to remove 90% of the [[antibody generator|proteins responsible for allergic reactions]].<ref>{{cite web |title=How Vytex Works |publisher=Vystar |year=2009 |url=http://www.vytex.com/Consumers/howvytexworks.aspx?pageid=C8 |access-date=26 August 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100530223349/http://www.vytex.com/Consumers/howvytexworks.aspx?pageid=C8 |archive-date=30 May 2010}}</ref> An allergen-free condom made of synthetic latex (polyisoprene) is also available.<ref name="isoprenepr" />

==== Synthetic ====
The most common non-latex condoms are made from [[polyurethane]]. Condoms may also be made from other synthetic materials, such as [[AT-10 resin]], and most [[polyisoprene]].<ref name="isoprenepr">{{cite press release |title=Lifestyles Condoms Introduces Polyisoprene Non-latex |publisher=HealthNewsDigest.com |date=31 July 2008 |url=http://healthnewsdigest.com/news/New_Product_460/Lifestyles_Condoms_printer.shtml |access-date=24 August 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080823054656/http://healthnewsdigest.com/news/New_Product_460/Lifestyles_Condoms_printer.shtml |archive-date=23 August 2008}}</ref>

Polyurethane condoms tend to be the same width and thickness as latex condoms, with most polyurethane condoms between 0.04&nbsp;mm and 0.07&nbsp;mm thick.<ref>{{cite web |title=Condoms |work=Condom Statistics and Sizes |date=12 March 2008 |url=http://blog.condomman.com/articles/condom-use/all-you-need-to-know-on-condom-statistics-and-sizes/ |access-date=31 May 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130525205018/http://blog.condomman.com/articles/condom-use/all-you-need-to-know-on-condom-statistics-and-sizes/ |archive-date=25 May 2013}}</ref>

Polyurethane can be considered better than latex in several ways: it conducts heat better than latex, is not as sensitive to temperature and ultraviolet light (and so has less rigid storage requirements and a longer shelf life), can be used with oil-based [[Personal lubricant|lubricants]], is less allergenic than latex, and does not have an odor.<ref name="nonlatex">{{cite journal |title=Nonlatex vs Latex Condoms: An Update |journal=The Contraception Report |volume=14 |issue=2 |date=September 2003 |url=http://www.contraceptiononline.org/contrareport/article01.cfm?art=243 |access-date=14 August 2006 |archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20060926035226/http://www.contraceptiononline.org/contrareport/article01.cfm?art=243 |archive-date = 26 September 2006 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Polyurethane condoms have gained FDA approval for sale in the United States as an effective method of contraception and HIV prevention, and under laboratory conditions have been shown to be just as effective as latex for these purposes.<ref name="AlicePolyLatex">{{cite web |title=Are polyurethane condoms as effective as latex ones? |publisher=Columbia University |date=22 February 2005 |url=http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/1842.html |access-date=25 May 2007 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070530000038/http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/1842.html |archive-date=30 May 2007}}</ref>

However, polyurethane condoms are less elastic than latex ones, and may be more likely to slip or break than latex,<ref name="nonlatex" /><ref name="AlicePoly">{{cite web |title=Prefers polyurethane protection |publisher=Columbia University |date=4 March 2005 |url=http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/1203.html |access-date=25 May 2007 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070609115429/http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/1203.html |archive-date=9 June 2007}}</ref> lose their shape or bunch up more than latex,<ref name="PPAA">{{cite news |title=Allergic to Latex? You Can Still Have Safer Sex |url=http://blog.advocatesaz.org/2012/05/02/allergic-to-latex-you-can-still-have-safer-sex |access-date=2 May 2012 |publisher=Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona |date=2 May 2012 |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120910032846/http://blog.advocatesaz.org/2012/05/02/allergic-to-latex-you-can-still-have-safer-sex/|archive-date=10 September 2012}}</ref> and are more expensive.

Polyisoprene is a synthetic version of natural rubber latex. While significantly more expensive,<ref name="isopreneglove">{{cite web |title=Polyisoprene Surgical Gloves |publisher=SurgicalGlove.net |year=2008 |url=http://www.surgicalglove.net/polyisoprene.html | access-date = 24 August 2008 | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080918193917/http://www.surgicalglove.net/polyisoprene.html | archive-date = 18 September 2008}}</ref> it has the advantages of latex (such as being softer and more elastic than polyurethane condoms)<ref name="isoprenepr" /> without the protein which is responsible for latex allergies.<ref name="isopreneglove" /> Unlike polyurethane condoms, they cannot be used with an oil-based lubricant.<ref name="PPAA" />

==== Lambskin ====
Condoms made from [[sheep]] [[intestine]]s, labeled "lambskin", are also available. Although they are generally effective as a contraceptive by blocking sperm, studies have found that they are less effective than latex in preventing the transmission of [[sexually transmitted infections]] because of pores in the material.<ref>{{cite book |author=Boston Women's Health Book Collective |title=Our Bodies, Ourselves: A New Edition for a New Era |publisher=Touchstone |location=New York, NY |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-7432-5611-7 |page=[https://archive.org/details/ourbodiesoursel00bost/page/333 333] |url=https://archive.org/details/ourbodiesoursel00bost/page/333}}</ref> This is because intestines, by their nature, are porous, permeable membranes, and while sperm are too large to pass through the pores, viruses—such as [[HIV]], [[herpes]], and [[genital warts]]—are small enough to pass.<ref name="PPAA" />

As a result of laboratory data on condom porosity, in 1989, the FDA began requiring lambskin condom manufacturers to indicate that the products were not to be used for the prevention of sexually transmitted infections.<ref name="books.google.com">{{cite web |title=FDA Consumer Investigative Reports - Condoms Relabeled for Accuracy |date=January 1992 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LIct5Kf9iHcC&pg=SA1992-PA42 |access-date=23 September 2019 |archive-date=4 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210504112841/https://books.google.com/books?id=LIct5Kf9iHcC&pg=SA1992-PA42 |url-status=live }}</ref> The FDA cautions that while lambskin condoms "provide good birth control and a varying degree of protection against some, but not all, sexually transmitted diseases", people do not know what STIs a partner might have, and thus cannot assume that a lambskin condom will protect them.<ref name="books.google.com"/>

While lambskin condoms avoid triggering [[latex allergies]], [[polyurethane]] condoms do as well, while also protecting more reliably against STIs.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Taylor |first1=James S. |last2=Erkek |first2=Emel |date=2004-08-24 |title=Latex allergy: diagnosis and management |journal=Dermatologic Therapy |language=en |volume=17 |issue=4 |pages=289–301 |doi=10.1111/j.1396-0296.2004.04024.x |issn=1396-0296|doi-access=free |pmid=15327474 }}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last=Kulig |first=John |date=October 2003 |title=Condoms: the basics and beyond |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15122165 |journal=Adolescent Medicine |volume=14 |issue=3 |pages=633–645, vii |doi=10.1016/S1041349903500494 |doi-broken-date=1 November 2024 |issn=1041-3499 |pmid=15122165}}</ref> As slaughter by-products, lambskin condoms are also not [[vegetarian]]. Pharmacist advice prepared by the ''[[Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal]]'' says that lambskin condoms "are generally not recommended" due to limited STI prevention.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ruddock |first=Brent |date=September 2004 |title=Condoms protect you: shield yourself from STIs |journal=Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal |volume=137 |issue=7 |pages=42 |id={{ProQuest|221125941}}}}</ref> An article in ''Adolescent Medicine'' advises that they "should be used only for pregnancy prevention".<ref name=":1" />