The Washington Post editorial perspective printed in The Japan Times on March 21, "Lacking condom sense," concedes that abstinence is the best remedy for controlling AIDS, but adds that the world "isn't perfect — and neither is Pope Benedict's pronouncement on the effectiveness of condoms in the battle against HIV/AIDS. The evidence says so."

What evidence? The editorial fails to say amid its rambling about AIDS statistics. Strange as it may seem, current scientific evidence — not what some doctors established long ago — actually supports what the pope said. Edward Green, director of Harvard University's AIDS Prevention Research Project, in a recent interview with National Review, concurs fully with the pope and confirms that condoms are not as effective as touted and can worsen the HIV situation, especially in Africa.

The liberal media seem content to repeat unscientific prejudices without following the evidence. Under clinical conditions, yes, consistently and correctly used condoms seem partially effective against the spread of HIV, but in real life, most couples do not use condoms consistently or correctly. Evidence? Look at the spread of AIDS in major cities where condoms are distributed freely.

Condoms delude users into believing they are immune to sexually transmitted diseases and encourage them to engage in more frequent and more risky liaisons. Evidence? Examine the statistics on contemporary sexual activities compared to those of pre-prophylactic days. The little that condoms have done in reducing AIDS is more than undone by the increased sexual activities that they have brought about.

How about areas where the spread of HIV has been reduced? In all such cases, evidence suggests that the reduction was more due to behavioral changes — for example, being faithful to a single partner — than to condom use. If only newspapers gave us raw evidence instead of propagating their petty prejudices!

francis britto