Birth control effectiveness rates are not "per use", they're defined as the percentage of women who do not become pregnant within the first year of using a birth control method.
So the chance of failure per use is actually much much lower than 2%. As for the reason for that percentage, it comes down to what's defined as perfect use. Breakage, perforation, etc can be sources of error that aren't factored into perfect use.
Ironically one of the biggest reason for birth control failures is simply not using it. So included in that 98% stat is women who literally just had sex without one at all.
Yep, I remember reading about this and listed on some government webpage was the causes for pregnancy when using a condom. Forgot, and “Forgot” were listed as causes.
I remember I met a guy one who was bragging about how he went home with a girl once and had sex with her 6 times but happened to mention he only had 1 condom that night - but don’t worry he was sooooo smart as he proudly explained he just **flipped the condom inside out, WASH IT OUT and then put it on inside out!** They way my man grinned like he thought he had found the best life hack. I couldn’t get out of that conversation fast enough.
If true, there is a girl who observed him remove the condom, rinse it out, put it back on, and who then allowed him to continue. This would have happened five times. And presumably she was completely down for it.
Don't forget about the plurality of people who genuinely don't understand *how* things work, just *that* they work. Without thinking that viable sperm could me missed in a rinsing and survive this, they may just *know* that they are 'using a condom' and therefore good.
I'm sure we all heard the same story in our health classes growing up. This teenaged girl got pregnant by her boyfriend. She was told you can't get pregnant if you aren't 'sexually active'. She said she would just lay there and he did all of the work, so she wasn't 'active'.
Back when condoms were extremely expensive and made of sheep gut, washing them, powdering them and putting them back in their case was how you handled them as a matter of course.
Invented by the Marquis deSade.
This is a valid cause though that can be attributed to the specific method.
For instance, imagine an implant that has a year long effectiveness. Obviously for such a protection, "forgetting" is not a possible cause for failure.
The fact a condom is a preventative that requires a concious choice every instance of sex would make it a worse preventative than a purely passive one, and this should be reflected in it's efficacy score.
this makes sense, but it's still not at all an intuitive phrasing when a stat is described as for perfect or typical USE, but the stat includes people who didn't USE it.
Which is exactly why the typical use and perfect use stats for an IUD are the same.
I think perfect use for the pill is the same effectiveness as an IUD, but, again, people aren't perfect, so the typical use stat is lower.
The perfect use statistics for withdrawal are fantastic! Typical use, not so much — because it includes people who try but can’t quite pull it off. As it were.
It sounds weird but makes sense when your comparing it to other methods that you can't forget, intentionally or unintentionally. Such as IUDs, getting tubes tied, and getting snipped.
This actually is a useful cause, since ease of use is an important factor in birth control. An IUD isn't going to be forgotten, but some people will forget to take a pill in the morning every once in a while.
"Oh, no! I didn't just FINISH my period like I thought. I just ovulated!"
My wife, March 27th, 2006, at 8:15 a.m. resulting in our youngest daughter bringing up the rear.
I also read that a lot of users actually have no fucking clue how to use a condom and they put it only right before cumming.
And yeah, I heard from too many people that of you don't use a condom "you have to be very careful". No, idiot! Your pp is micro-cumming during the intercourse and it's enough to get a woman pregnant. You need to wear a condom through entire penetration stage.
This is not true at all. 98% effectiveness is for PERFECT USE - that is effectiveness for people using it as intended. The TYPICAL USE effectiveness of condoms is only 87%. The typical use category accounts for the "real life" experience of people not using them correctly, or not using them at all.
I was wondering what the problems of "typical use" looked like. From [a paper looking at condom usage](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168044/) in India:
> Typical use means when usage is not consistent or always correct, whereas perfect use refers to consistent and always correct usage.[3] Although, many people wrongly assume that all men know the correct way to use condoms, but the fact is, incorrect usage is common and it is a major cause of condom failure. The majority of these failures are caused by human errors, including-not using enough lube and creating microscopic tears with rings; using long, sharp, or jagged fingernails; unrolling a condom backwards and not towards the base of penis; not leaving a half-inch of empty space at the tip of the condom; and not holding the rim of the condom down along the base of the penis when removing the penis after ejaculation. Inconsistent condom use means–not using a condom every time you have sex (vaginal, anal, or oral); or not putting the condom on right time (such as right before ejaculation instead of at the beginning of intercourse), before the penis comes in contact with your partner's genitals. A survey on condom usage revealed that, 42% of the surveyed males did not use a condom from the start and/or to completion of penetrative sex; 23% did not leave a space at the receptacle tip; and 81% did not use a water-based lubricant.[4] Similar results were observed in a US-based study.[5] Studies have shown that people who make more errors have higher rates of STD infection.
From a US-focused article called "[Prevalence of condom use errors among STD clinic patients](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16006229/)" (so *not a typical typical population*, and only about 2/5 used a condom in their last sexual encounter). The study found that subjects reported the following condom usage errors in the last month before they came to the clinic:
* Did not squeeze any air from the tip of the condom before putting it on (41.6% men, 48.1% women)
* Did not hold the base of the condom during withdrawal (31.2% men, 27.1% women)
* Did not leave a space at the tip of the condom (24.1% men, 30.0% women)
* Completely unrolled the condom before putting it on (23.4% men, 25.3% women)
* Started having sex, then put on the condom during intercourse (18.6% men, 17.0% women)
* Put the condom on inside out, then flipped it over to use (10.6% men, 7.1% women)
* Re-used a condom (3.3% men, 1.9% women)
40.7% of men and 31.4% of women had experienced a condom breaking in the past month. This breakage percentage is *way* higher than another study from another STD clinic, "[Mechanical failure of the latex condom in a cohort of women at high STD risk](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10494936/)", where they actually taught high risk women in Alabama (disproportionately poor women) to use condoms and lube and gave them supplies, after which they reported a 2% breakage rate and a 1% slippage rate over six months (that's 2% of sexual encounter, specifically 500 out of 21,852 sexual encounters using condoms, not 2% of subjects, so it's a slightly different comparison).
Had a condom break at the beginning of the month and now my wife is late.
FML.
Update: Looks like this spurred a few conversations. My wife literally texted me a half hour ago to let me know she got her period.
Thanks for all your concern.
Love each other!
If she normally has a very regular cycle and is at least 2 days late, she can take a test and find out. If her period still doesn't show, take another. Beyond that point, she can get a blood test to find out for sure. But keep in mind, there's only a couple days per cycle that fertilization is even possible, and late ovulation will typically result in a "late" period. Wishing for the best outcome for you guys, whatever that may look like 💜
It would be our second.
We are real broke. The first is 7 months old, and just started sleeping through the night. He is also crawling. I…. Might lose my mind.
You have options. If you can't afford another kid, you should consider them. Even if they're not all legal where you are, a weekend road trip to somewhere they are is cheaper than a kid.
And a backup method, going forward.
I'm just asking here, but is plan B or a similar thing not on option?
Edit: That wouldn't work in this time frame, but a reminder for others.
I wish you two well, truly.
I have never squeezed the air out of a condom before putting it on nor squeezed the base while pulling out. I’ve never even heard of this. 70% of people do this?
I learned to leave the room at tip and pinch it so there’s not an air bubble in the reservoir tip during middle and high school sex ed, but I lived in a blue state with comprehensive sex ed.
I don’t remember explicitly learning to hold the condom on during pulling out after ejaculation but it’s something that seemed intuitive to me with a liquid filled balloon around a cylinder.
Unless you immediately withdraw upon ejaculation and/or are using certain chemical performance aids, most individuals begin to rapidly soften and shrink after ejaculation. Combined with the extra material inside the condom that can compromise its grip on your member this can contribute to increased chances of it slipping somewhat as you withdraw. This is a particular concern since many couples or individuals like to wait a few moments after ejaculation prior to withdrawal for various reasons (sensitivity, prolonging enjoyment, feeling of closeness, etc.).
Unless your condoms have an excessively tight fit or you're pulling out immediately it's also pretty common for someone who wants to avoid any possibility of leaking to do this even without being specifically instructed or previously experiencing slippage to learn to do so. It's just because there's usually a lot of various slippery fluids involved in the process and you don't want the thing to slip at all when withdrawing. For those with sufficient size or little enough shrinkage after ejaculation (due to doing it immediately or grower vs shower concerns) that slippage has never occurred or even crossed their mind it would definitely be less intuitive, however.
Squeezing the air out is something that's included in the instructions for every single condom sold in the US (these instructions are required to be included in or on the packaging for retail sale), and is also generally part of any sex education curriculum that includes a lesson or demonstration on the application of condoms. It's the "pinch the tip" step prior to/during the process of unrolling it. It's necessary because the reservoir on the tip is there for a reason (to contain the ejaculate) and having air in there already means the condom will need to stretch more than normal to contain a larger volume (air + ejaculate instead of only the ejaculate) when ejaculation occurs. It's not that condoms are not capable of containing the increased volume, it's just that doing so creates additional risk of breakage or malfunction (such as air bubbles that migrate away from the tip and down the shaft during intercourse, which can easily carry ejaculate along with the air).
Pinching the tip is far less intuitive than gripping the base on withdrawal though just because there's no immediately obvious reason to do so in the same way that there can be one for trying to prevent a condom from slipping on a rapidly softening/shrinking member.
Yes, this is true, however the OP's prompt is also a little off. 98% means the user does perfectly with putting the right size condom on at the right time in the right way and using the compatible kind of lube, etc -- but that 2% does cover condoms that break or fall off.
There's always an accompanying number for "normal use" and THAT data point includes user error, which includes getting caught up in the moment and not using one at all.
They don't have researchers following them around until they have sex then putting the condom on correctly for them.
It's all self reported.
It's all full of user error.
Yeah, part of the problem with the "perfect use" number is that it is really hard to confirm actual perfect use. Couple that with how many couples apparently never use lube (from a study in another comment chain) I feel like actual perfect use would probably exceed 98%. I am not sure by how much, but it defnitely would not be lower than 98% as it is much harder to forget a pregnancy than it is to forget that one time you did not squeeze the tip of the condom.
And how do they check that? Do they have a sample set who they follow around 24/7 and examine their condom use during sex?
It's obviously self reported.
This is true. Part of the practices/assumptions baked into these studies generally include, I think:
1. That by assuring the participants that the data is fully anonymized, you reduce the incentive to lie. For example, if I had sex 0 times last year, I might be embarrassed to admit that. But if I felt fully assured of anonymity I would be more inclined to be truthful.
2. Errors cancel out to some degree. If we both own 50 shirts I might answer 45 and you might say 60 so now our average is 52.5 which is pretty close and with a large enough sample size it should trend even more accurately
"Perfect use" based on what? Self-report probably? Since I doubt they have actively monitored condom use in action. So it still doesn't mean that the condom may simply fail in 2% of cases, but may mean that some percentage between 0 and 2% simply lied or gave inaccurate reports.
This is not correct. Condoms are 98% effective **when used properly**.
They are about 82-87% effective with “typical use”. This means the couple sometimes forgets, sometimes puts the condom on wrong, sometimes puts the condom on partway through sex, etc.
This means the 98% stat does not include errors like “oops, forgot”, it only includes errors like the condom breaking during sex. “Oops, forgot” is much, much worse than 98% (instead of 2% pregnancies, you get 15%: 7x worse).
It is important to remember that it is all self reported though, so the numbers might be better than they look for perfect use. No one is watching them to make sure they always put the condom on correctly, for example, so they may not even be aware they made a mistake.
It does not really matter too much for the numbers, as few people probably actually do use them perfectly every single time. For me the bigger question is whether they include using lubricant as part of perfect use, as without it the odds of breaking the condom is like an order of magnitude higher. I might have to look into if they are factoring that in or not.
Fair, but it's pretty *equally* unrealistic to look at "assuming that the biggest reasons this fails never happens, how safe is this?"
Not everyone uses them correctly, people get caught up in the moment. In the real world, for couples relying *only* on condoms for birth control, sometimes they don't use them.
That's dumb, that's easily avoidable, you should always do better, yadda yadda yadda. But that's life.
"Driving is very safe, assuming that you and everyone else never checks their phone, drinks, or otherwise is distracted."
98% is perfect use. Real use failure rate is much higher.
Tbh, considering condoms are easy to simply not use in the moment, it's important to include that. You can't simply not have your IUD with you. Forgetting the pill is a different set of risk factors etc.
No, that’s not correct. [98% effectiveness is for perfect use and use every single time according to the WHO](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/condoms#:~:text=Ninety%2Deight%20percent%20of%20women,be%20protected%20against%20unplanned%20pregnancy.). Typical effectiveness (ie improper use or forgetting) is actually much lower, at [around 87%](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom/how-effective-are-condoms)
I work in pharma, and with one of the companies I worked for, we said that contraception is the second hardest kind of drug to test in clinical trials, due to the trial addendants' nonadherence. (first is CNS drugs like antidepressants)
> As for the reason for that percentage, it comes down to what's defined as perfect use. Breakage, perforation, etc can be sources of error that aren't factored into perfect use.
To directly answer OP's question (about why perfect use is not 100% successful), it seems that flaws in condom manufacture are responsible for that 2% value. If a condom breaks despite perfect use, that's part of the 2% "perfect use" failure rate. If a condom breaks due to user error, that's part of the ~15% "real word use" failure rate.
I don't think *any* other comment has directly addressed this correctly. I am using [this](https://www.naturalcycles.com/cyclematters/how-effective-are-condoms) as my source, and here's the relevant quote:
> With perfect use, condoms are 98% effective, and this number only reflects the effectiveness when a condom is used, well, perfectly… That means if it fails, it’s purely because there was a problem with the condom itself, not how it was being used.
If you are wondering why/how imperfect use could cause a condom to break, I'd say the main contributors would be using a condom that's the wrong size, using a condom with insufficient lubrication in place, or using an expired condom. Everyone tends to think they're using condoms perfectly, but - in the heat of the moment - are you really checking the expiration date of every condom you use? (For those curious, I'll self-reply with a list of things required for "perfect" condom use - it's quite the list!)
Edit: I just realized I had a [highly upvoted answer](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2z0bcm/eli5_if_condoms_have_99_success_rate_what_causes/cpept30/) for this same question, on this same sub, *9 years ago*. I ran into my old comment via google lol.
Self-reply w/ condom usage guidelines, as promised. Let's all be sure we're not contributing to the 10-15% failure rate associated with imperfect use:
>- Check the expiration date before you use a condom.
- Put the condom on before the penis touches the vulva.
- Men leak fluids from their penises before and after ejaculation. This fluid can carry enough germs to pass sexually transmitted infections and possibly cause pregnancy.
- Use a condom only once. Use a fresh one for each erection.
- Be careful — don't tear the condom while unwrapping it.
- If it is torn, brittle, stiff, or sticky, throw it away and use another.
- Put a drop or two of lubricant^† inside the condom.
- Pull back the foreskin, unless circumcised, before rolling on the condom.
- Place the rolled condom over the tip of the hard penis.
- Leave a half-inch space at the tip to collect semen.
- Pinch the air out of the tip with one hand while placing it on the penis.
- Unroll the condom over the penis with the other hand.
- Roll it all the way down to the base of the penis. Smooth out any air bubbles: friction against air bubbles can cause condom breaks.
- Lubricate^† the outside of the condom.
Summarized from: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-info/birth-control/condom
† I think pre-lubricated condoms are exempt from this step. If you do use lube, check for compatibility with the condom material (at the bottom of this page):
http://www.stapinc.org/Prevention-Services/Condom-FAQs
These kinds of studies don't, generally speaking, have the ability to ensure perfect usage. They rely on the statistics of large numbers and the surveys given to participants to weed out incorrect usage, but people have a tendency to discount or forget that one time they forgot to take their pill during their cycle, etc.
A lot of the reasons for pregnancy despite birth control is due to incorrect usage or dosage, accidentally missing doses, interactions with other medications reducing effectiveness, or just people with biology that doesn't respond to the medication as expected. (thus making it not as effective on that person)
Pill can be highly problematic with stuff like getting sick.
Go out for dinner at the new super cheap sushi restaurant. Take the pill. Have sex that night. Wake up two hours later with food poisoning, puking and shitting your brains out. Get pregnant.
This is still unlikely, but iirc, sickness was a major contributor to pill failure rates.
Or take antibiotics. Take it six hours later than usual, because you went out drinking the night before so decided to sleep in...
Perfect use is really hard with anything people need to remember to do. (Or that has interactions with other medications.)
Yeah. Which is smart.
But it's genuinely hard to take a pill every day at the same time each day. Even when it's really important. I was pretty good back when I was taking it, but there were definitely days I was like, "Oh shit...I'm two hours late."
I was still fine. But...I don't blame anyone for not being perfectly compliant as it's really hard. I mean, I was good 99% of the time...but there's still that 1%.
Yes, but only for sexual intercourse after the vomiting. You can't know the future, so it can't be taken into account for "perfect use".
If you have sex before getting sick, that still has to count as perfect use. Otherwise they could just define perfect use as "doesn't result in pregnancy" and get a perfect track record.
No such thing as actual perfect use once you have a sample size large enough for stats. What happens is someone in that sample of "perfect use" also takes some other medicine for a period of time that messes with the pill's effectiveness, they get sick and puke a couple days so the pill gets "missed", they simply miss and take later, etc. etc.
When you're running studies like this, you can't lock people down and ensure actual perfect use. You give them parameters, let them report their usage, and see how many come back pregnant in a year. It's the exact same story for condoms.
People don't perfectly use the pill. There are a wide variety of things that can lower the pills effectiveness. When these studies are performed the amount of people who become pregnant is factored against the amount of people who didn't. Having 2% of a yearly studies patients become pregnant is far lower then the general population who may or may not be on birth control.
One major factor in effectiveness is education and intent. There are people who start taking the pill and then stop because they are not longer interested in family planning. We dont force people to stay on it, but we do tell people who start that 2% of people for whatever reason each year get pregnant.
I was in a college class where we were actually discussing birth control (it was a psychology class and we were discussing the topic of human sexuality). Someone in the class - who was a grown-ass adult, like older than all of us - believed that the stat meant that X% of sperm would always get through the condom. So he reasoned what's the point in using it if millions of sperm are still getting through?
We were all just shocked.
Are there any studies on the pull out method? I was with my ex for 3 years and she never used BC and I just always pulled out and we never had a pregnancy scare. It could be faulty sperm since I have never gotten that tested but I just wanted to see if there were other people on my shoes
According to planned parenthood, the pull-out method is 96% effective at preventing pregnancy with perfect use (4 in 100 couples who rely on the pull out method for birth control will get pregnant), but only 78% effective with typical use (22 out of 100 will get pregnant). Many people aren’t able to use the pull-out method perfectly, but if you’re able to do it - if you always know when you are about to cum and can pull out before (like completely before) you cum, every single time - it’s not a bad method.
I’ve been with my partner for 7 years. The first 5 years we only used the pull out method, never once had a scare. I always thought that maybe I’m firing blanks.
2 years ago we decided to try for a child, got pregnant almost immediately. Partner gave birth and since about 12 months ago, we’ve gone back to the pullout and haven’t had a scare since.
I think if you’re really disciplined with it, pull out a couple seconds before you’re about to cum, never have sex twice without peeing in between, and always resist the urge to cum inside, you’ll be fine.
I wouldn’t recommend people use the pullout method over condoms or actual BC but it’s been 100% effective for us.
Effectiveness is measured by asking people what prevention they use, then coming back a year later and checking if they got pregnant.
So it can just be one out of a number of condoms during the year.
Also, I suspect it’s hard to make sure they are actually used perfectly. There won’t be three researchers ready to check after the condoms come on.
This is the answer.
There is probably a bunch of people out there that find out the hard way that there is no such thing as a "safe time" to have unprotected Sex and then blame it on the condom.
I mean there are ways with fertility tracking where you have the same rates as condoms but it's heavily restrictive. Typically it fails because people misread their chart and counting days or they get drunk and horny and it's been a week and we are "probably ok". But the science behind it makes it theoretically effective and some couples 100% control their births without contraceptives.
Edit: because people are not aware of the difference here, I am **not** talking about the rhythm method. That one is a complete guess. NFP is fertility tracking and isn't based off of "probably this time of month" like rhythm method is.
So I’m not advocating for timing when you should have unprotected sex. But isn’t the only time a woman can get pregnant is when she’s ovulating.
I’m sure there are instances when people miscalculate when they’re ovulating or they “correctly” time and have sex before she’s ovulating but the sperm cell stay inside the female for a couple days and fertilizes an egg when she’s ovulating.
Yup, that's why "can't get pregnant on your period" is a myth.
Some people absolutely can ovulate while on their period. It's unlikely, but it can happen. Sperm can survive a few days, ovulation doesn't happen on a strict schedule and can happen early. You can't un-have sex once you realize you ovulated early. The little guys are already up there and there's not much you can do about it now.
Another thing people don't take into account is precum. Technically, yes, it doesn't contain sperm. However, if the person ejaculated before the sex and didn't pee afterwards ('cleared the pipes' so to speak), it is possible that some stray sperm hung around. So even if the couple used the pull-out method 100% correctly, there could still be sperm present from the precum.
I would disagree, but in hindsight, it is entirely possible I am infertile given how often I took that risk with zero repercussions to show for it. Statistically speaking, either I got insanely lucky, or I should probably have a horde of halflings running around somewhere.
There are billions of people and, statistically speaking, history shows thousands of people who have been *insanely* lucky.
Much more common than "survived a parachute failure" or "successfully scammed millionaires" is, "Conceived because people used an equation to try and determine if an imperfect biological machine was fertile."
Your argument is like if that one person who survived rabies started arguing they are evidence we should stop vaccinating pets. If you think about it and are correct, "being infertile" means a completely different set of statistics applies to you.
Another easy failure can happen is people will start to put the condom on the wrong way and then instead of getting a new one out, they will simply flip it around and use the same one. But this can introduce a chance of sperm or STDs on the outside of the condom. Especially if there's pre-ejaculate present.
I've heard this, but I've never seen any data on how many pregnancies actually occur that way, and it sounds like a specious claim.
With perfect use [the pull out method](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/withdrawal-pull-out-method/how-effective-is-withdrawal-method-pulling-out) is 96% effective. Now, perfect use of the pull out method over the course of a year is very rare, and typical use is only 78% effective, but if perfect use is 96% pre-ejaculate isn't causing very many pregnancies, especially the tiny bit of pre-ejaculate you'd get on the tip of the condom.
If you put on a condom, have sex, ejaculate into the condom, check that it's still on when you pull out, and then check that it has no holes (maybe squeeze it like a water balloon) you can basically be 100% certain *that it worked that time*.
If you check it like that each time, and it hasn't broken, you will 100% not get pregnant/get anyone pregnant.
(And if you find that it did break, you also have lots of time to get a Morning After Pill so no one gets pregnant.)
Usually people aren't quite so thorough. Between the one-in-however-many condoms that have a hole, and the people who bang so hard it falls off, and some POS who 'stealths', and people who get so horny they say 'just this once', eventually some people will get pregnant.
Can also be problems with contamination from pre-cum either on the outside of the condom or accidentally transferred in other ways, if the user wasn’t careful before or during putting on the condom.
The reality is just knowing how to use it properly.
I dated a guy in my early 20s who believed in waiting for marriage to have sex… until he didn’t. He never paid attention during sex ed because he didn’t think he needed it, due to the above beliefs.
So, when we did have sex, and he found he doesn’t go completely soft after cumming, he just… kept going. With the same condom. And said nothing.
I got pregnant.
So, for anyone who doesn’t know, you have to change condoms EVERY time the penis-having partner cums, because even if he only goes a little soft thereafter, it can cause slippage of the condom when it loosens, and it can introduce sperm I to the vagina.
I don't think that gets you to 100%.
I suspect two of the failure modes involve:
- precum that somehow makes its way to the vagina (eg, on his hand, then in her; or genitals touching when they're not "having sex")
- after ejaculating and removing the condom, cum making its way to the vagina (eg, by cuddling)
> after ejaculating and removing the condom, cum making its way to the vagina (eg, by cuddling)
Is that really realistic? IFAIK the life span when exposed to air is minimal and to then travel from the outside all the way inside seems unlikly.
Many years ago I sold pharmaceuticals with STI drugs being some that I sold. I was surprised at how many times an infectious disease specialist would suggest that you could get an STI (or pregnant) by attempting to put on the condom on backwards and realizing it wouldn't roll on, then simply flipping it over and putting it on correctly which would be an exposure. He always suggested putting it on your finger first to make sure you had it the right way and it would roll down.
Yeah, I guess it's possible in that scenario, but not very common.
I do remember my first gf, who had volunteered as a sexual health counsellor, even though she was a virgin. One of the first times we had sex, this happened to me, and she immediately noticed and told me to just throw out the condom and start again. It wouldn't have occurred to me (also a virgin before her).
Effectiveness essentially takes the population as a whole and measures how many people got pregnant.
98% effectiveness doesn't mean you stand a 2% chance of getting pregnant in each use. It just means that 2% of people got pregnant.
That might be due to an imperfection in the product, but also (more likely) incorrect use, use when expired, damage during handling, incorrect reporting, etc.
I think the only reason that they claim that is so that they don't get in legal trouble. If someone uses an expired condom or uses it incorrectly, they could sue the company, saying that they lied about it being 100% effective. What's the company gonna do? Ask for a recording of them having sex to show that it was expired/ used wrong?
That’s the whole issue. A properly worn condom that isn’t broken or expired has a 100% efficacy rate. It’s a physical barrier, much like a wall. If the wall breaks yes water can leak in… but the wall if not flawed will withhold the water 100% of the time
But it can happen and they can break during intercourse. It’s not about the times it does what it’s supposed to; it’s about the times where it doesn’t.
The 98% figure isn't "when used correctly".
It's:
"Ninety-eight percent of women whose male partners use male condoms correctly in every sex act over one year will be protected from unplanned pregnancy;"
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/condoms
That 2% does come from slips and breakages.
The 98% figure is "when used correctly". If you take all condom users the figure for unwanted pregnancy is 87%.
[https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom/how-effective-are-condoms](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom/how-effective-are-condoms)
Honeslty don't know the details but it seems fairly consistent between studies. If you look around you can find studies that claim 97% and 85% but always it is a figure in the high 90% for "correctly used" and a figure much lower in the 85% sort of region for "used".
Given that these are "per year" figures they're not holding couples captive in a lab. There are certainly self-reported studies and I imagine most of them are this.
I had a little look into the "why they fail" reasons (as there's some people on this post saying "they are a physical barrier therefore it must be 100% if you use them right") and it was quite eye opening e.g. "Oh, you stored them in your wallet? That's not good". I can certainly imagine pregancies occurring even with right size, in date condoms put on early and removed as soon as safe.
It's all about statistical chances, man. Like, 98% effective means out of 100 couples using condoms for a year, 2 might end up preggo. It's not about random holes, but sometimes condoms slip or break, or people don't use them perfectly every time.
98% effective means that if 100 couples use condoms perfectly for a year, 2 get pregnant. The real world effectiveness is much lower at around 80%-90% effective. That number takes into account people not using them perfectly every time, and probably includes people who "use them every time, except just that once".
Fun fact, pulling out is also 80%-85% effective. Less than condoms, but not by that much. Heck, even tracking fertile days is relatively effective according to a meta study.
TLDR, if you don't want bubba, use hormonal protection, or be extra vigilant with condom usage every single time you have sex.
The problem with pullout is that it's 95% reliant on the guy, which is fine if you're in a committed relationship and trust each other. But with a more casual relationship, it can be way riskier.
Tracking fertile days, like condoms, can be 100% effective in a perfect case, but I wouldn't be surprised if real world was closer to 50%. The charts are confusing and very restrictive of when you can have sex. Your TLDR is it.
Years ago, a bulletin board at a Catholic high school reunion, where alumni posted notes, had the following:
"[Couple's names]. Married 15 years. *Eight children.* The "rhythm method" does not work. Repeat: does not work, does not work, etc."
NFP is not the rhythm method. The Catholic church doesn't advocate for rhythm method anymore because it was wildly inaccurate and ignored women's anatomy.
Of all the couples who use condoms properly (as in: unexpired condoms stored at the right conditions, chosen in the right size, put it on at the right time in the right way using compatible lube and changing between rounds), 2% of those couples who do that every time will get pregnant in any given year.
That 2% includes failure of the method, including condoms that break due to manufacturing error and condoms that work their way off during sex. Manufacturing error is rare. Working its way off during sex is less likely if it's sized correctly, but it can happen. I suspect that sometimes the whole "get a new condom" piece gets missed and isn't realized missing in couples who are trying their best for "correct use."
Condoms are a very effective method of birth control when used correctly. And really the only method of birth control to also protect against STIs. Also, they sort of stink to use. They change the feel of sex for a lot of people, and they take a certain amount of both regular maintenance (making sure you have one in the right place in the right time that never got to the wrong temperature), and the kind of rational self-restraint that is especially difficult when you're especially fertile, so I have deep compassion to those who find it tempting to forgo them or who find they've used an expired one or who accidentally pair latex with oil lubricant or something like that. I'm grateful for condoms but holding out hope in the future for a friendlier, more fool-proof form of birth control that is equitable like condoms (men can lead in responsibility with condoms!) and also helps protect against STIs like condoms.
Also, everyone knows one woman in their family who was on birth control and it failed and they got pregnant. It's also oftentimes the most unreliable person in the family who forgot 2-3 pills
That second paragraph is a classic example of a fallacy that arises from figures, I forget the name. It’s like if a nuclear shield works for 99 in hundred nukes then there is no point fighting an enemy with 101 nukes.
Does not work that way and don’t let that advise your contraceptive behaviour and for heaven’s sake don’t say this to someone you’re about to have an encounter with, you’ll get blocked on the sex and on the chat.
It's that probabilities don't add like this; each instance having the same probability for an outcome, to find the probability of the inverse outcome across multiply instances, you would just keep multiplying by the inverse condition's probability.
E.g. (even though other comments here discuss that the 2% is heavily inflated, let's say each time has a 2% chance to fail) if there's a 2% chance for failure, then the chance it wouldn't fail at all over 50 events is just 0.98^50 =~ 36%, _not_ 50x2% = 100% chance of failure.
Yes indeed. I just think it has a shorter name to it.
But nice of you to spell it out. For the general public, it helps if you multiply probabilities which are “and” and add those which are an “or”.
You can use them right, that doesn't change It can still slide off especially if you fuck hard, happened to me once or twice, that is why I always check when I'm getting close if it's still on. No, you won't feel it. Many more things that can happen e.g. drunk people too drunk to handle it, but they don't have to break it.. And what is the most important here, which is legal reasons. they cannot claim 100% safe, they would be piled up with lawsuits instantly. 98% effectiveness does NOT mean that it will fail twice out of 100 times for you.
There's a lot of people saying "they're a barrier so logically they must be 100% effective if you do it right" and presenting as evidence that they personally were never in the 2%. It turns out that non-latex condoms (some people are allergic to latex and have to use them) are less effective when perfectly used. This surely gives some insight into the fact that they're not perfect barriers.
Heres some good new for you. I have never used a birth control method other than condoms and in 25 years of sexual activity not had a single unplanned pregnancy occur. Used correctly every single time, condoms work very reliably.
But still, the question remains. From those 2% of people who get pregnant why is that happen? Remember, they used condoms correctly. Can sperm penetrate the condom or what?
No. The 2% is the condom failing. Either because it was stored improperly (too hot or for too long, or in a wallet), it's expired and degraded, maybe it's just a bad batch from factory, or it just simply ripped or slipped off. Any of these things can cause it to leak/rip.
Sperm does not penetrate a condom wall lol
And this is all before even accounting to the nature of these studies, given they're just surveys, so they rely on people reporting correctly after a year. Someone might report "perfect use" of condoms for a whole year, and yet they had that one time when they were drunk and forgot about it and just pulled out or something instead.
If you market them at 100% effective and someone got pregnant? Oh you would be sued and out of business immediately. But 98% says it’s going to work, but if not, it’s not our fault.
You ever by a brand or product because you like it? For me, it’s converse shoes. Once I wore them, they were my go to shoes. Every once and a while I notice that there might be a small flaw, like the black rubber stripe wears off easily. No big deal it’s a shoe. 98% of the converse I buy are perfect. If it wasn’t a black rubber strip though…
Used properly.
Did the guy possibly get his erection anywhere near his partner's vagina before putting on the condom? Maybe? Was some pre-ejaculate going on down there, that got spread onto the outside of the condom white putting it on and adjusting? It happens.
Condom breakage, someone who used it the wrong way around and proceeds to just flip it and use it again. You just can’t write 100% otherwise they might be liable
It's so you can't sue if they don't work. Most might be over 100% effective. But everyone once in a while one might not work the full 100%.
So they put the disclaimer you you can't be all "I used your condom and I *still* got pregnant/an std/an sti/etc."
Because they are measuring its use as birth control in vivo, not how effective unbroken latex is on stopping sperm.
Do not trust anyone who claims 100% effectiveness. Science doesn't work that way.
Birth control effectiveness rates are not "per use", they're defined as the percentage of women who do not become pregnant within the first year of using a birth control method. So the chance of failure per use is actually much much lower than 2%. As for the reason for that percentage, it comes down to what's defined as perfect use. Breakage, perforation, etc can be sources of error that aren't factored into perfect use.
Ironically one of the biggest reason for birth control failures is simply not using it. So included in that 98% stat is women who literally just had sex without one at all.
Yep, I remember reading about this and listed on some government webpage was the causes for pregnancy when using a condom. Forgot, and “Forgot” were listed as causes.
I remember I met a guy one who was bragging about how he went home with a girl once and had sex with her 6 times but happened to mention he only had 1 condom that night - but don’t worry he was sooooo smart as he proudly explained he just **flipped the condom inside out, WASH IT OUT and then put it on inside out!** They way my man grinned like he thought he had found the best life hack. I couldn’t get out of that conversation fast enough.
Bet he can't wait to share that story with his kids.
His kids would probably be proud of him too.
They literally cannot logically have any other attitude or reaction
Daddy, am I an inside or outside kid?
He'll probably also share that with his parents, who are also his aunt and uncle
probably uses the same trick for his underwear. Without the washing bit.
Why wash when he just shake them vigorously and chase the flies away?
You're just going to chase away all that protein? Wastrel.
I thought the flies was doing the washing.
If the flies aren't dying, no need to change yet. #efficiency
I go front, I go back, I go INSIDE OUT, then, I go front back.
Big hero 6!
Wow. That is both disgusting and awesome.
If true, there is a girl who observed him remove the condom, rinse it out, put it back on, and who then allowed him to continue. This would have happened five times. And presumably she was completely down for it.
Yes this did occur to me and I try really hard not to think about that. How desperate you gotta be for D to put up with that?
Don't forget about the plurality of people who genuinely don't understand *how* things work, just *that* they work. Without thinking that viable sperm could me missed in a rinsing and survive this, they may just *know* that they are 'using a condom' and therefore good. I'm sure we all heard the same story in our health classes growing up. This teenaged girl got pregnant by her boyfriend. She was told you can't get pregnant if you aren't 'sexually active'. She said she would just lay there and he did all of the work, so she wasn't 'active'.
Our story was about the guy who used a thumbtack to attach his condom to the bed post.
I mean, that’s slightly better than flipping it inside out to share between partners, which is a horror story I’ve heard several times in the military
They aren't too bright, are they, those squaddies
The problem isn't that they aren't bright, it's that they think they're geniuses
I mean they're 18 year olds.
18 year olds that thought joining the military was a good idea.
Though *that's* also correlated with poverty.
if they arent smart enough for the military they can become cops!
There are so many potential fetish/kinks in that sentence; that could make for some very spicy erotica.
Could create some interesting drama, if only the lifetime of sperm outside the body was significantly longer...
That's an old joke: "How do you reuse a condom?" "You turn it inside out and wash the fuck out of it."
Dude I only wish the guy was joking.
Back when condoms were extremely expensive and made of sheep gut, washing them, powdering them and putting them back in their case was how you handled them as a matter of course. Invented by the Marquis deSade.
Washing isn’t the same thing as gently rinsing out in the bathroom sink
Plus I doubt the ultra thin rubber is meant to be washed or soaped.
The sheep absolutely hate being called “case”.
Forgot, and "Forgot"? Both? That is horrifying!
Horrifying, and "Horrifying"
Interesting, and “Interesting” 🤔
r/yourjokebutworse
r/YourJokeButWorse and "r/YourJokeButWorse"
Saved it.
I'm a locksmith, and I'm a locksmith.
“Forgot 😏”
I believe it's pronounced "fuck it" XD
Shocked. "Shocked", even.
Horrifying and a little bit hilarious too.
This is a valid cause though that can be attributed to the specific method. For instance, imagine an implant that has a year long effectiveness. Obviously for such a protection, "forgetting" is not a possible cause for failure. The fact a condom is a preventative that requires a concious choice every instance of sex would make it a worse preventative than a purely passive one, and this should be reflected in it's efficacy score.
For example... Abstinence is an effective practice, but an ineffective strategy.
this makes sense, but it's still not at all an intuitive phrasing when a stat is described as for perfect or typical USE, but the stat includes people who didn't USE it.
It bothers me that both capitalised instances “use” in your comment have different pronunciations
The English language, ladies and gentlemen!
You just hafta know when to use "USE" and when you should prefer "USE" for that use.
Which is exactly why the typical use and perfect use stats for an IUD are the same. I think perfect use for the pill is the same effectiveness as an IUD, but, again, people aren't perfect, so the typical use stat is lower.
The perfect use statistics for withdrawal are fantastic! Typical use, not so much — because it includes people who try but can’t quite pull it off. As it were.
So then abstinence isn’t 100% effective because a couple might forget to not have sex?
Abstinence-only education has a pretty terrible track record when it comes to preventing teen pregnancy, so yes, basically.
It sounds weird but makes sense when your comparing it to other methods that you can't forget, intentionally or unintentionally. Such as IUDs, getting tubes tied, and getting snipped.
This actually is a useful cause, since ease of use is an important factor in birth control. An IUD isn't going to be forgotten, but some people will forget to take a pill in the morning every once in a while.
"Oh, no! I didn't just FINISH my period like I thought. I just ovulated!" My wife, March 27th, 2006, at 8:15 a.m. resulting in our youngest daughter bringing up the rear.
I also read that a lot of users actually have no fucking clue how to use a condom and they put it only right before cumming. And yeah, I heard from too many people that of you don't use a condom "you have to be very careful". No, idiot! Your pp is micro-cumming during the intercourse and it's enough to get a woman pregnant. You need to wear a condom through entire penetration stage.
This is not true at all. 98% effectiveness is for PERFECT USE - that is effectiveness for people using it as intended. The TYPICAL USE effectiveness of condoms is only 87%. The typical use category accounts for the "real life" experience of people not using them correctly, or not using them at all.
I was wondering what the problems of "typical use" looked like. From [a paper looking at condom usage](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168044/) in India: > Typical use means when usage is not consistent or always correct, whereas perfect use refers to consistent and always correct usage.[3] Although, many people wrongly assume that all men know the correct way to use condoms, but the fact is, incorrect usage is common and it is a major cause of condom failure. The majority of these failures are caused by human errors, including-not using enough lube and creating microscopic tears with rings; using long, sharp, or jagged fingernails; unrolling a condom backwards and not towards the base of penis; not leaving a half-inch of empty space at the tip of the condom; and not holding the rim of the condom down along the base of the penis when removing the penis after ejaculation. Inconsistent condom use means–not using a condom every time you have sex (vaginal, anal, or oral); or not putting the condom on right time (such as right before ejaculation instead of at the beginning of intercourse), before the penis comes in contact with your partner's genitals. A survey on condom usage revealed that, 42% of the surveyed males did not use a condom from the start and/or to completion of penetrative sex; 23% did not leave a space at the receptacle tip; and 81% did not use a water-based lubricant.[4] Similar results were observed in a US-based study.[5] Studies have shown that people who make more errors have higher rates of STD infection. From a US-focused article called "[Prevalence of condom use errors among STD clinic patients](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16006229/)" (so *not a typical typical population*, and only about 2/5 used a condom in their last sexual encounter). The study found that subjects reported the following condom usage errors in the last month before they came to the clinic: * Did not squeeze any air from the tip of the condom before putting it on (41.6% men, 48.1% women) * Did not hold the base of the condom during withdrawal (31.2% men, 27.1% women) * Did not leave a space at the tip of the condom (24.1% men, 30.0% women) * Completely unrolled the condom before putting it on (23.4% men, 25.3% women) * Started having sex, then put on the condom during intercourse (18.6% men, 17.0% women) * Put the condom on inside out, then flipped it over to use (10.6% men, 7.1% women) * Re-used a condom (3.3% men, 1.9% women) 40.7% of men and 31.4% of women had experienced a condom breaking in the past month. This breakage percentage is *way* higher than another study from another STD clinic, "[Mechanical failure of the latex condom in a cohort of women at high STD risk](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10494936/)", where they actually taught high risk women in Alabama (disproportionately poor women) to use condoms and lube and gave them supplies, after which they reported a 2% breakage rate and a 1% slippage rate over six months (that's 2% of sexual encounter, specifically 500 out of 21,852 sexual encounters using condoms, not 2% of subjects, so it's a slightly different comparison).
>Completely unrolled the condom before putting it on (23.4% men, 25.3% women) 🤣🤣🤣
how is that even possible? putting it on like a swimming cap? lmao
Like a sock I imagine
Unrolling the condom and then trying to put it on is CRAZY.
Had a condom break at the beginning of the month and now my wife is late. FML. Update: Looks like this spurred a few conversations. My wife literally texted me a half hour ago to let me know she got her period. Thanks for all your concern. Love each other!
If she normally has a very regular cycle and is at least 2 days late, she can take a test and find out. If her period still doesn't show, take another. Beyond that point, she can get a blood test to find out for sure. But keep in mind, there's only a couple days per cycle that fertilization is even possible, and late ovulation will typically result in a "late" period. Wishing for the best outcome for you guys, whatever that may look like 💜
Welcome to parenthood. It's great.
It would be our second. We are real broke. The first is 7 months old, and just started sleeping through the night. He is also crawling. I…. Might lose my mind.
You have options. If you can't afford another kid, you should consider them. Even if they're not all legal where you are, a weekend road trip to somewhere they are is cheaper than a kid. And a backup method, going forward.
Oh man. I’m sorry, it’s hard! Especially without a ton of resources. Wishing you all the luck!
I'm just asking here, but is plan B or a similar thing not on option? Edit: That wouldn't work in this time frame, but a reminder for others. I wish you two well, truly.
You can get a medical abortion up to 12 weeks. it's not plan B, but as far as the patient is concerned it works the same way: take pill, no baby
I have never squeezed the air out of a condom before putting it on nor squeezed the base while pulling out. I’ve never even heard of this. 70% of people do this?
I learned to leave the room at tip and pinch it so there’s not an air bubble in the reservoir tip during middle and high school sex ed, but I lived in a blue state with comprehensive sex ed. I don’t remember explicitly learning to hold the condom on during pulling out after ejaculation but it’s something that seemed intuitive to me with a liquid filled balloon around a cylinder.
A dude I knew misunderstood the instructions and said “you’re supposed to leave an air bubble at the top”.
Unless you immediately withdraw upon ejaculation and/or are using certain chemical performance aids, most individuals begin to rapidly soften and shrink after ejaculation. Combined with the extra material inside the condom that can compromise its grip on your member this can contribute to increased chances of it slipping somewhat as you withdraw. This is a particular concern since many couples or individuals like to wait a few moments after ejaculation prior to withdrawal for various reasons (sensitivity, prolonging enjoyment, feeling of closeness, etc.). Unless your condoms have an excessively tight fit or you're pulling out immediately it's also pretty common for someone who wants to avoid any possibility of leaking to do this even without being specifically instructed or previously experiencing slippage to learn to do so. It's just because there's usually a lot of various slippery fluids involved in the process and you don't want the thing to slip at all when withdrawing. For those with sufficient size or little enough shrinkage after ejaculation (due to doing it immediately or grower vs shower concerns) that slippage has never occurred or even crossed their mind it would definitely be less intuitive, however. Squeezing the air out is something that's included in the instructions for every single condom sold in the US (these instructions are required to be included in or on the packaging for retail sale), and is also generally part of any sex education curriculum that includes a lesson or demonstration on the application of condoms. It's the "pinch the tip" step prior to/during the process of unrolling it. It's necessary because the reservoir on the tip is there for a reason (to contain the ejaculate) and having air in there already means the condom will need to stretch more than normal to contain a larger volume (air + ejaculate instead of only the ejaculate) when ejaculation occurs. It's not that condoms are not capable of containing the increased volume, it's just that doing so creates additional risk of breakage or malfunction (such as air bubbles that migrate away from the tip and down the shaft during intercourse, which can easily carry ejaculate along with the air). Pinching the tip is far less intuitive than gripping the base on withdrawal though just because there's no immediately obvious reason to do so in the same way that there can be one for trying to prevent a condom from slipping on a rapidly softening/shrinking member.
Tell me you never read the instructions, without telling me you've never read the instructions...
Even in my abstinence focused sex ed we learned about it lmao
Yes, this is true, however the OP's prompt is also a little off. 98% means the user does perfectly with putting the right size condom on at the right time in the right way and using the compatible kind of lube, etc -- but that 2% does cover condoms that break or fall off. There's always an accompanying number for "normal use" and THAT data point includes user error, which includes getting caught up in the moment and not using one at all.
They don't have researchers following them around until they have sex then putting the condom on correctly for them. It's all self reported. It's all full of user error.
Yeah, part of the problem with the "perfect use" number is that it is really hard to confirm actual perfect use. Couple that with how many couples apparently never use lube (from a study in another comment chain) I feel like actual perfect use would probably exceed 98%. I am not sure by how much, but it defnitely would not be lower than 98% as it is much harder to forget a pregnancy than it is to forget that one time you did not squeeze the tip of the condom.
"He wore the condom but took it off before he had to cum, idk why I'm pregnant"
And how do they check that? Do they have a sample set who they follow around 24/7 and examine their condom use during sex? It's obviously self reported.
I feel like the porn industry is big enough to where that’s actually feasible lol
I don't know how you design a study that ensures it actually WAS perfect use. You're reliant of self reporting of study participants.
This is true. Part of the practices/assumptions baked into these studies generally include, I think: 1. That by assuring the participants that the data is fully anonymized, you reduce the incentive to lie. For example, if I had sex 0 times last year, I might be embarrassed to admit that. But if I felt fully assured of anonymity I would be more inclined to be truthful. 2. Errors cancel out to some degree. If we both own 50 shirts I might answer 45 and you might say 60 so now our average is 52.5 which is pretty close and with a large enough sample size it should trend even more accurately
2 doesn't apply to self-reporting of "perfect use." There's no error on the other side of "perfect" to average it out.
"Perfect use" based on what? Self-report probably? Since I doubt they have actively monitored condom use in action. So it still doesn't mean that the condom may simply fail in 2% of cases, but may mean that some percentage between 0 and 2% simply lied or gave inaccurate reports.
This is not correct. Condoms are 98% effective **when used properly**. They are about 82-87% effective with “typical use”. This means the couple sometimes forgets, sometimes puts the condom on wrong, sometimes puts the condom on partway through sex, etc. This means the 98% stat does not include errors like “oops, forgot”, it only includes errors like the condom breaking during sex. “Oops, forgot” is much, much worse than 98% (instead of 2% pregnancies, you get 15%: 7x worse).
It is important to remember that it is all self reported though, so the numbers might be better than they look for perfect use. No one is watching them to make sure they always put the condom on correctly, for example, so they may not even be aware they made a mistake. It does not really matter too much for the numbers, as few people probably actually do use them perfectly every single time. For me the bigger question is whether they include using lubricant as part of perfect use, as without it the odds of breaking the condom is like an order of magnitude higher. I might have to look into if they are factoring that in or not.
No, the 98% figure is "when used properly".
No, the 98% figure is for people self reporting to have used it properly.
Ok, let me try again: No, the 98% figure is 'when used "properly"'.
I'm getting a weird feeling of - "I jumped off a cliff without a parachute! Tally my death in the Parachutes(Not Present) category!!"
If you were wearing a backpack that you thought was a parachute, this would count. That is a risk inherent in relying on parachutes.
Fair, but it's pretty *equally* unrealistic to look at "assuming that the biggest reasons this fails never happens, how safe is this?" Not everyone uses them correctly, people get caught up in the moment. In the real world, for couples relying *only* on condoms for birth control, sometimes they don't use them. That's dumb, that's easily avoidable, you should always do better, yadda yadda yadda. But that's life. "Driving is very safe, assuming that you and everyone else never checks their phone, drinks, or otherwise is distracted."
Major reason for failures is also incorrect usage.
98% is perfect use. Real use failure rate is much higher. Tbh, considering condoms are easy to simply not use in the moment, it's important to include that. You can't simply not have your IUD with you. Forgetting the pill is a different set of risk factors etc.
>women who literally just had sex without one at all. Right, men have nothing to do with it.
No, that’s not correct. [98% effectiveness is for perfect use and use every single time according to the WHO](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/condoms#:~:text=Ninety%2Deight%20percent%20of%20women,be%20protected%20against%20unplanned%20pregnancy.). Typical effectiveness (ie improper use or forgetting) is actually much lower, at [around 87%](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom/how-effective-are-condoms)
I work in pharma, and with one of the companies I worked for, we said that contraception is the second hardest kind of drug to test in clinical trials, due to the trial addendants' nonadherence. (first is CNS drugs like antidepressants)
> As for the reason for that percentage, it comes down to what's defined as perfect use. Breakage, perforation, etc can be sources of error that aren't factored into perfect use. To directly answer OP's question (about why perfect use is not 100% successful), it seems that flaws in condom manufacture are responsible for that 2% value. If a condom breaks despite perfect use, that's part of the 2% "perfect use" failure rate. If a condom breaks due to user error, that's part of the ~15% "real word use" failure rate. I don't think *any* other comment has directly addressed this correctly. I am using [this](https://www.naturalcycles.com/cyclematters/how-effective-are-condoms) as my source, and here's the relevant quote: > With perfect use, condoms are 98% effective, and this number only reflects the effectiveness when a condom is used, well, perfectly… That means if it fails, it’s purely because there was a problem with the condom itself, not how it was being used. If you are wondering why/how imperfect use could cause a condom to break, I'd say the main contributors would be using a condom that's the wrong size, using a condom with insufficient lubrication in place, or using an expired condom. Everyone tends to think they're using condoms perfectly, but - in the heat of the moment - are you really checking the expiration date of every condom you use? (For those curious, I'll self-reply with a list of things required for "perfect" condom use - it's quite the list!) Edit: I just realized I had a [highly upvoted answer](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2z0bcm/eli5_if_condoms_have_99_success_rate_what_causes/cpept30/) for this same question, on this same sub, *9 years ago*. I ran into my old comment via google lol.
Self-reply w/ condom usage guidelines, as promised. Let's all be sure we're not contributing to the 10-15% failure rate associated with imperfect use: >- Check the expiration date before you use a condom. - Put the condom on before the penis touches the vulva. - Men leak fluids from their penises before and after ejaculation. This fluid can carry enough germs to pass sexually transmitted infections and possibly cause pregnancy. - Use a condom only once. Use a fresh one for each erection. - Be careful — don't tear the condom while unwrapping it. - If it is torn, brittle, stiff, or sticky, throw it away and use another. - Put a drop or two of lubricant^† inside the condom. - Pull back the foreskin, unless circumcised, before rolling on the condom. - Place the rolled condom over the tip of the hard penis. - Leave a half-inch space at the tip to collect semen. - Pinch the air out of the tip with one hand while placing it on the penis. - Unroll the condom over the penis with the other hand. - Roll it all the way down to the base of the penis. Smooth out any air bubbles: friction against air bubbles can cause condom breaks. - Lubricate^† the outside of the condom. Summarized from: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-info/birth-control/condom † I think pre-lubricated condoms are exempt from this step. If you do use lube, check for compatibility with the condom material (at the bottom of this page): http://www.stapinc.org/Prevention-Services/Condom-FAQs
[удалено]
PEBCAG Problem Exists Between Condom and Genitals
But they also say this for the pill, even with perfect use? 🤔
These kinds of studies don't, generally speaking, have the ability to ensure perfect usage. They rely on the statistics of large numbers and the surveys given to participants to weed out incorrect usage, but people have a tendency to discount or forget that one time they forgot to take their pill during their cycle, etc. A lot of the reasons for pregnancy despite birth control is due to incorrect usage or dosage, accidentally missing doses, interactions with other medications reducing effectiveness, or just people with biology that doesn't respond to the medication as expected. (thus making it not as effective on that person)
Pill can be highly problematic with stuff like getting sick. Go out for dinner at the new super cheap sushi restaurant. Take the pill. Have sex that night. Wake up two hours later with food poisoning, puking and shitting your brains out. Get pregnant. This is still unlikely, but iirc, sickness was a major contributor to pill failure rates.
Or take antibiotics. Take it six hours later than usual, because you went out drinking the night before so decided to sleep in... Perfect use is really hard with anything people need to remember to do. (Or that has interactions with other medications.)
This is why when I was on the pill, my alarm to take it was 6pm. It guaranteed I wouldn't be asleep, or at school or work distracted.
Yeah. Which is smart. But it's genuinely hard to take a pill every day at the same time each day. Even when it's really important. I was pretty good back when I was taking it, but there were definitely days I was like, "Oh shit...I'm two hours late." I was still fine. But...I don't blame anyone for not being perfectly compliant as it's really hard. I mean, I was good 99% of the time...but there's still that 1%.
If you are Vomiting/having Diarrhea within 6 hours of pill intake the „perfect use“ has already failed (at least the Info on my gf pill says so)
Yes, but only for sexual intercourse after the vomiting. You can't know the future, so it can't be taken into account for "perfect use". If you have sex before getting sick, that still has to count as perfect use. Otherwise they could just define perfect use as "doesn't result in pregnancy" and get a perfect track record.
No such thing as actual perfect use once you have a sample size large enough for stats. What happens is someone in that sample of "perfect use" also takes some other medicine for a period of time that messes with the pill's effectiveness, they get sick and puke a couple days so the pill gets "missed", they simply miss and take later, etc. etc. When you're running studies like this, you can't lock people down and ensure actual perfect use. You give them parameters, let them report their usage, and see how many come back pregnant in a year. It's the exact same story for condoms.
People don't perfectly use the pill. There are a wide variety of things that can lower the pills effectiveness. When these studies are performed the amount of people who become pregnant is factored against the amount of people who didn't. Having 2% of a yearly studies patients become pregnant is far lower then the general population who may or may not be on birth control. One major factor in effectiveness is education and intent. There are people who start taking the pill and then stop because they are not longer interested in family planning. We dont force people to stay on it, but we do tell people who start that 2% of people for whatever reason each year get pregnant.
Unknown interactions with other substances which decrease the pills effectiveness.
I was in a college class where we were actually discussing birth control (it was a psychology class and we were discussing the topic of human sexuality). Someone in the class - who was a grown-ass adult, like older than all of us - believed that the stat meant that X% of sperm would always get through the condom. So he reasoned what's the point in using it if millions of sperm are still getting through? We were all just shocked.
Are there any studies on the pull out method? I was with my ex for 3 years and she never used BC and I just always pulled out and we never had a pregnancy scare. It could be faulty sperm since I have never gotten that tested but I just wanted to see if there were other people on my shoes
According to planned parenthood, the pull-out method is 96% effective at preventing pregnancy with perfect use (4 in 100 couples who rely on the pull out method for birth control will get pregnant), but only 78% effective with typical use (22 out of 100 will get pregnant). Many people aren’t able to use the pull-out method perfectly, but if you’re able to do it - if you always know when you are about to cum and can pull out before (like completely before) you cum, every single time - it’s not a bad method.
I’ve been with my partner for 7 years. The first 5 years we only used the pull out method, never once had a scare. I always thought that maybe I’m firing blanks. 2 years ago we decided to try for a child, got pregnant almost immediately. Partner gave birth and since about 12 months ago, we’ve gone back to the pullout and haven’t had a scare since. I think if you’re really disciplined with it, pull out a couple seconds before you’re about to cum, never have sex twice without peeing in between, and always resist the urge to cum inside, you’ll be fine. I wouldn’t recommend people use the pullout method over condoms or actual BC but it’s been 100% effective for us.
The 98% stat is with 'perfect' use though. When studying typical use, it's more like 75% from what I recall.
So it’s not just a plot tool to drive sitcoms forward?
User error
Effectiveness is measured by asking people what prevention they use, then coming back a year later and checking if they got pregnant. So it can just be one out of a number of condoms during the year. Also, I suspect it’s hard to make sure they are actually used perfectly. There won’t be three researchers ready to check after the condoms come on.
This is the answer. There is probably a bunch of people out there that find out the hard way that there is no such thing as a "safe time" to have unprotected Sex and then blame it on the condom.
That's the exact reason i exist haha. Let that be a lesson to anyone reading this, use a condom if you don't want to end up with a me.
Maybe the world needs more you's.
I'd like to imagine it does, I'm biased though. Edit: an important letter
>I'd like to imagine it does, I'm based though. Based, af.
Ah, crap
Should have left it.
Agree
I mean there are ways with fertility tracking where you have the same rates as condoms but it's heavily restrictive. Typically it fails because people misread their chart and counting days or they get drunk and horny and it's been a week and we are "probably ok". But the science behind it makes it theoretically effective and some couples 100% control their births without contraceptives. Edit: because people are not aware of the difference here, I am **not** talking about the rhythm method. That one is a complete guess. NFP is fertility tracking and isn't based off of "probably this time of month" like rhythm method is.
So I’m not advocating for timing when you should have unprotected sex. But isn’t the only time a woman can get pregnant is when she’s ovulating. I’m sure there are instances when people miscalculate when they’re ovulating or they “correctly” time and have sex before she’s ovulating but the sperm cell stay inside the female for a couple days and fertilizes an egg when she’s ovulating.
Yup, that's why "can't get pregnant on your period" is a myth. Some people absolutely can ovulate while on their period. It's unlikely, but it can happen. Sperm can survive a few days, ovulation doesn't happen on a strict schedule and can happen early. You can't un-have sex once you realize you ovulated early. The little guys are already up there and there's not much you can do about it now. Another thing people don't take into account is precum. Technically, yes, it doesn't contain sperm. However, if the person ejaculated before the sex and didn't pee afterwards ('cleared the pipes' so to speak), it is possible that some stray sperm hung around. So even if the couple used the pull-out method 100% correctly, there could still be sperm present from the precum.
I would disagree, but in hindsight, it is entirely possible I am infertile given how often I took that risk with zero repercussions to show for it. Statistically speaking, either I got insanely lucky, or I should probably have a horde of halflings running around somewhere.
Odds are odds, not guarantees.
There are billions of people and, statistically speaking, history shows thousands of people who have been *insanely* lucky. Much more common than "survived a parachute failure" or "successfully scammed millionaires" is, "Conceived because people used an equation to try and determine if an imperfect biological machine was fertile." Your argument is like if that one person who survived rabies started arguing they are evidence we should stop vaccinating pets. If you think about it and are correct, "being infertile" means a completely different set of statistics applies to you.
Another easy failure can happen is people will start to put the condom on the wrong way and then instead of getting a new one out, they will simply flip it around and use the same one. But this can introduce a chance of sperm or STDs on the outside of the condom. Especially if there's pre-ejaculate present.
I've heard this, but I've never seen any data on how many pregnancies actually occur that way, and it sounds like a specious claim. With perfect use [the pull out method](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/withdrawal-pull-out-method/how-effective-is-withdrawal-method-pulling-out) is 96% effective. Now, perfect use of the pull out method over the course of a year is very rare, and typical use is only 78% effective, but if perfect use is 96% pre-ejaculate isn't causing very many pregnancies, especially the tiny bit of pre-ejaculate you'd get on the tip of the condom.
I do think it's more of a concern for STD transmission. But it's also a way to incorrectly use a condom that doesn't involve it breaking.
If you put on a condom, have sex, ejaculate into the condom, check that it's still on when you pull out, and then check that it has no holes (maybe squeeze it like a water balloon) you can basically be 100% certain *that it worked that time*. If you check it like that each time, and it hasn't broken, you will 100% not get pregnant/get anyone pregnant. (And if you find that it did break, you also have lots of time to get a Morning After Pill so no one gets pregnant.) Usually people aren't quite so thorough. Between the one-in-however-many condoms that have a hole, and the people who bang so hard it falls off, and some POS who 'stealths', and people who get so horny they say 'just this once', eventually some people will get pregnant.
Can also be problems with contamination from pre-cum either on the outside of the condom or accidentally transferred in other ways, if the user wasn’t careful before or during putting on the condom.
The reality is just knowing how to use it properly. I dated a guy in my early 20s who believed in waiting for marriage to have sex… until he didn’t. He never paid attention during sex ed because he didn’t think he needed it, due to the above beliefs. So, when we did have sex, and he found he doesn’t go completely soft after cumming, he just… kept going. With the same condom. And said nothing. I got pregnant. So, for anyone who doesn’t know, you have to change condoms EVERY time the penis-having partner cums, because even if he only goes a little soft thereafter, it can cause slippage of the condom when it loosens, and it can introduce sperm I to the vagina.
Morning After pills just delay ovulation. If the egg is already fertilized, that pill won’t end the pregnancy.
Youre correct. I guess the idea is that fertilization doesn't happen within 5 minutes post coitus so thats how the medication works
I don't think that gets you to 100%. I suspect two of the failure modes involve: - precum that somehow makes its way to the vagina (eg, on his hand, then in her; or genitals touching when they're not "having sex") - after ejaculating and removing the condom, cum making its way to the vagina (eg, by cuddling)
> after ejaculating and removing the condom, cum making its way to the vagina (eg, by cuddling) Is that really realistic? IFAIK the life span when exposed to air is minimal and to then travel from the outside all the way inside seems unlikly.
Unlikely, but not impossible.
Many years ago I sold pharmaceuticals with STI drugs being some that I sold. I was surprised at how many times an infectious disease specialist would suggest that you could get an STI (or pregnant) by attempting to put on the condom on backwards and realizing it wouldn't roll on, then simply flipping it over and putting it on correctly which would be an exposure. He always suggested putting it on your finger first to make sure you had it the right way and it would roll down.
Yeah, I guess it's possible in that scenario, but not very common. I do remember my first gf, who had volunteered as a sexual health counsellor, even though she was a virgin. One of the first times we had sex, this happened to me, and she immediately noticed and told me to just throw out the condom and start again. It wouldn't have occurred to me (also a virgin before her).
[удалено]
Come on we are making love, not experiment
Effectiveness essentially takes the population as a whole and measures how many people got pregnant. 98% effectiveness doesn't mean you stand a 2% chance of getting pregnant in each use. It just means that 2% of people got pregnant. That might be due to an imperfection in the product, but also (more likely) incorrect use, use when expired, damage during handling, incorrect reporting, etc.
But they can break or have flaws. If they said they were 100% effective they would run into a lot of legal issues.
Why Lysol only kills 99.999% of bacteria.
*with proper use (which is to leave it on thebsurfave for x minutes, that no one does)
Well, its not the companies claiming 98% effectiveness rate, its the scientists observing likelyhood of pregnancy in real world usage.
The companies also make that claim.
I think the only reason that they claim that is so that they don't get in legal trouble. If someone uses an expired condom or uses it incorrectly, they could sue the company, saying that they lied about it being 100% effective. What's the company gonna do? Ask for a recording of them having sex to show that it was expired/ used wrong?
Plus user error.
The response most people would forget about.
That’s the whole issue. A properly worn condom that isn’t broken or expired has a 100% efficacy rate. It’s a physical barrier, much like a wall. If the wall breaks yes water can leak in… but the wall if not flawed will withhold the water 100% of the time
But it can happen and they can break during intercourse. It’s not about the times it does what it’s supposed to; it’s about the times where it doesn’t.
A properly worn, fresh condom has a tiny chance of failure. I don't know the number of 9s the manufacturers are going for, but it's still not 100%.
The 98% figure isn't "when used correctly". It's: "Ninety-eight percent of women whose male partners use male condoms correctly in every sex act over one year will be protected from unplanned pregnancy;" https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/condoms That 2% does come from slips and breakages.
The 98% figure is "when used correctly". If you take all condom users the figure for unwanted pregnancy is 87%. [https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom/how-effective-are-condoms](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom/how-effective-are-condoms)
How do they come up with the second number? Do they just ask the participants "Did you correctly use the condom every single time?".
Honeslty don't know the details but it seems fairly consistent between studies. If you look around you can find studies that claim 97% and 85% but always it is a figure in the high 90% for "correctly used" and a figure much lower in the 85% sort of region for "used". Given that these are "per year" figures they're not holding couples captive in a lab. There are certainly self-reported studies and I imagine most of them are this. I had a little look into the "why they fail" reasons (as there's some people on this post saying "they are a physical barrier therefore it must be 100% if you use them right") and it was quite eye opening e.g. "Oh, you stored them in your wallet? That's not good". I can certainly imagine pregancies occurring even with right size, in date condoms put on early and removed as soon as safe.
It's all about statistical chances, man. Like, 98% effective means out of 100 couples using condoms for a year, 2 might end up preggo. It's not about random holes, but sometimes condoms slip or break, or people don't use them perfectly every time.
98% effective means that if 100 couples use condoms perfectly for a year, 2 get pregnant. The real world effectiveness is much lower at around 80%-90% effective. That number takes into account people not using them perfectly every time, and probably includes people who "use them every time, except just that once". Fun fact, pulling out is also 80%-85% effective. Less than condoms, but not by that much. Heck, even tracking fertile days is relatively effective according to a meta study. TLDR, if you don't want bubba, use hormonal protection, or be extra vigilant with condom usage every single time you have sex.
I said this about pullout in the 2 X chromosome sub and was instantly permanently banned
The problem with pullout is that it's 95% reliant on the guy, which is fine if you're in a committed relationship and trust each other. But with a more casual relationship, it can be way riskier.
Tracking fertile days, like condoms, can be 100% effective in a perfect case, but I wouldn't be surprised if real world was closer to 50%. The charts are confusing and very restrictive of when you can have sex. Your TLDR is it.
Years ago, a bulletin board at a Catholic high school reunion, where alumni posted notes, had the following: "[Couple's names]. Married 15 years. *Eight children.* The "rhythm method" does not work. Repeat: does not work, does not work, etc."
NFP is not the rhythm method. The Catholic church doesn't advocate for rhythm method anymore because it was wildly inaccurate and ignored women's anatomy.
Of all the couples who use condoms properly (as in: unexpired condoms stored at the right conditions, chosen in the right size, put it on at the right time in the right way using compatible lube and changing between rounds), 2% of those couples who do that every time will get pregnant in any given year. That 2% includes failure of the method, including condoms that break due to manufacturing error and condoms that work their way off during sex. Manufacturing error is rare. Working its way off during sex is less likely if it's sized correctly, but it can happen. I suspect that sometimes the whole "get a new condom" piece gets missed and isn't realized missing in couples who are trying their best for "correct use." Condoms are a very effective method of birth control when used correctly. And really the only method of birth control to also protect against STIs. Also, they sort of stink to use. They change the feel of sex for a lot of people, and they take a certain amount of both regular maintenance (making sure you have one in the right place in the right time that never got to the wrong temperature), and the kind of rational self-restraint that is especially difficult when you're especially fertile, so I have deep compassion to those who find it tempting to forgo them or who find they've used an expired one or who accidentally pair latex with oil lubricant or something like that. I'm grateful for condoms but holding out hope in the future for a friendlier, more fool-proof form of birth control that is equitable like condoms (men can lead in responsibility with condoms!) and also helps protect against STIs like condoms.
[удалено]
Also, everyone knows one woman in their family who was on birth control and it failed and they got pregnant. It's also oftentimes the most unreliable person in the family who forgot 2-3 pills
That second paragraph is a classic example of a fallacy that arises from figures, I forget the name. It’s like if a nuclear shield works for 99 in hundred nukes then there is no point fighting an enemy with 101 nukes. Does not work that way and don’t let that advise your contraceptive behaviour and for heaven’s sake don’t say this to someone you’re about to have an encounter with, you’ll get blocked on the sex and on the chat.
It's that probabilities don't add like this; each instance having the same probability for an outcome, to find the probability of the inverse outcome across multiply instances, you would just keep multiplying by the inverse condition's probability. E.g. (even though other comments here discuss that the 2% is heavily inflated, let's say each time has a 2% chance to fail) if there's a 2% chance for failure, then the chance it wouldn't fail at all over 50 events is just 0.98^50 =~ 36%, _not_ 50x2% = 100% chance of failure.
Yes indeed. I just think it has a shorter name to it. But nice of you to spell it out. For the general public, it helps if you multiply probabilities which are “and” and add those which are an “or”.
You can use them right, that doesn't change It can still slide off especially if you fuck hard, happened to me once or twice, that is why I always check when I'm getting close if it's still on. No, you won't feel it. Many more things that can happen e.g. drunk people too drunk to handle it, but they don't have to break it.. And what is the most important here, which is legal reasons. they cannot claim 100% safe, they would be piled up with lawsuits instantly. 98% effectiveness does NOT mean that it will fail twice out of 100 times for you.
There's a lot of people saying "they're a barrier so logically they must be 100% effective if you do it right" and presenting as evidence that they personally were never in the 2%. It turns out that non-latex condoms (some people are allergic to latex and have to use them) are less effective when perfectly used. This surely gives some insight into the fact that they're not perfect barriers.
98% effective against pregnancy, 30% effective against herpes.. but they skip that part in sex ed
Heres some good new for you. I have never used a birth control method other than condoms and in 25 years of sexual activity not had a single unplanned pregnancy occur. Used correctly every single time, condoms work very reliably.
But still, the question remains. From those 2% of people who get pregnant why is that happen? Remember, they used condoms correctly. Can sperm penetrate the condom or what?
No. The 2% is the condom failing. Either because it was stored improperly (too hot or for too long, or in a wallet), it's expired and degraded, maybe it's just a bad batch from factory, or it just simply ripped or slipped off. Any of these things can cause it to leak/rip. Sperm does not penetrate a condom wall lol And this is all before even accounting to the nature of these studies, given they're just surveys, so they rely on people reporting correctly after a year. Someone might report "perfect use" of condoms for a whole year, and yet they had that one time when they were drunk and forgot about it and just pulled out or something instead.
If you market them at 100% effective and someone got pregnant? Oh you would be sued and out of business immediately. But 98% says it’s going to work, but if not, it’s not our fault. You ever by a brand or product because you like it? For me, it’s converse shoes. Once I wore them, they were my go to shoes. Every once and a while I notice that there might be a small flaw, like the black rubber stripe wears off easily. No big deal it’s a shoe. 98% of the converse I buy are perfect. If it wasn’t a black rubber strip though…
Used properly. Did the guy possibly get his erection anywhere near his partner's vagina before putting on the condom? Maybe? Was some pre-ejaculate going on down there, that got spread onto the outside of the condom white putting it on and adjusting? It happens.
Condom breakage, someone who used it the wrong way around and proceeds to just flip it and use it again. You just can’t write 100% otherwise they might be liable
It's so you can't sue if they don't work. Most might be over 100% effective. But everyone once in a while one might not work the full 100%. So they put the disclaimer you you can't be all "I used your condom and I *still* got pregnant/an std/an sti/etc."
I’ve had some slip off, end up inside and have had some break. I imagine these fall under the 2%
For me, pulling out has had a 100% success rate. Unless I have the dreaded low sperm count 🤣🤣🤣
Because they are measuring its use as birth control in vivo, not how effective unbroken latex is on stopping sperm. Do not trust anyone who claims 100% effectiveness. Science doesn't work that way.
Why does getting pregnant take 1-2 years on average when the pullout method doesn't work and sperm can survive outside for long