Non Latex Condoms

To me they have been the most wonderful invention. They get warm with friction and they are usuable with oil. Not to mention all those people who are allergic to latex. What is all known about them.

Also, the trojan ultra-thins break. Every time. Durex and others do not break. Don’t want to get Trojan breathing down my neck, but there is a defect.

I’m a fan of the rice paper condoms myself…and then again, that might explain the 5 kids… :confused:

Common ¢ for all ages…
“Well, there was that thing with the Cheese-Wiz…but I’m feeling much better now!” – John Astin, Night Court
“If ignorance is bliss, you must be orgasmic.”

WARNING. Non-latex condoms are NOT effective in preventing the spread of HIV. If HIV protection is something you’re looking for, DON’T use non-latex condoms.

The thought of lamb gut down there isn’t a big turn on.

I hate condoms.

Why can’t someone invent a male pill, one that prevents the formation of sperm, but that otherwise has no side effects. And, as an added benefit, when I WANT to father a child, all I have to do is stop taking the drug.

Even if it meant something like Norplant-like tubes of spermicide stuck into my scrotum, seems like it would be a lovely solution.

A pill with no side effects. Good luck on that one.

Of course, the Male Pill still wouldn’t solve that nasty HIV transmission problem.

Gypsy: Tom, I don’t get you.
Tom Servo: Nobody does. I’m the wind, baby.

There ARE non, latex condoms out there that are also not made of lamb gut. Avanti, I believe they’re called. I forget what material they’re made of, but it’s a synthetic.

A committee is a lifeform with six or more legs and no brain.

Sheep are your friend. You can make good use of lamb gut without condoms.

Not voted most anything

Trojan now makes a non-latex, non-skin condom called the Supra. It’s touted as being more sensitive and oil-and-water lubricant friendly. I bought a package of them, but haven’t been able to “field-test” them because my baby won’t take a nap. :frowning: I’ll let y’all know what Bons thinks of them when we get the chance. :smiley:

Prairie Rose

If you’re not part of the solution you’re just scumming up the bottom of the beaker.


Fruit leather.

There’s a new product on its way to market which should be an improvement on both latex and polyurethane. It’s made from the sap of the guayule plant, and it’s stronger and potentially cheaper than latex, with none of the allergens to which latex-sensitive people react. Not sure if it will be oil-friendly, but condoms would be thinner with more consistent quality.

Sure, I’m all for moderation – as long as it’s not excessive.

When I said non-latex condoms, I was referring to poly-urethene (spelling?) condoms. Have they just not been thoroughly tested? They seem every bit as durable as latex. I don’t trust lamb skin or natural skin. Never have.


Everytime. I had a three-pack, guess how many broke. A friend used them, he got wise after the second. Durex seems to be much better.

They are working on a male pill. Thought I heard something on it the other day. Just like the female pill, it does nothing to prevent the spread of STD’s.

Being long-time married and monogomous, HIV protection isn’t my problem, unwanted pregnancy is. My wife is on the pill, which has its pluses and minuses. I would go on a male pill if my minuses were less than her minuses. It’s just that every birth control method around sucks, I’m looking for something that sucks less. As it is now, if she has to use antibiotics, then we have to avoid sex for the duration, and something like a week afterwards. If we were BOTH on our pills, then it’s time to burn a hole in the mattress…

Since you’re interested only in the polyurethae condoms, I’ll try to dig up my Consumer Reports issue with the condom ratings. They discussed (but I don’t think they rated) polyurethane condoms.

IIRC, they’re thin, durable, and reliable, but a bit snug as a result of not being as stretchy. Never tried them myself. They did mention HIV and Hep permeability.

Sure, I’m all for moderation – as long as it’s not excessive.

The box insert on the Trojans I mentioned state that they DO indeed protect against HIV. I’m married and monogamous so I’m using condoms not to get pregnant, because hormonal birth control is not a good idea for me right now (I’m breastfeeding).

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:
(Yes, the sex was that good. So sue me.)

Chris fell asleep early the other night so we finally got a chance to make love again, this time using the new condoms. Bons said they were slightly better than the regular latex, but nothing really special.

Prairie Rose

If you’re not part of the solution you’re just scumming up the bottom of the beaker.

Yeah, didn’t think they’d be worth the extra cost since neither of is latex sensitive. We tried Micronor while my wife was breastfeeding (it’s the only safe one) but figured condoms had fewer side effects. Wonder if Trojan has somehow found a way to reduce their pore size. Did the package say that the HIV claim had been OK’d by FDA?

The Durex non-latex condoms come in the wider size. I don’t care for the tighter fit myself.

Who else out there have had the Trojan’s break. They should know about this.

Well, I found that Consumer Reports last night then left the dang thing home. No matter – at the time of publication (June 1999) only Avanti was on the market, and FDA had not yet determined either disease or pregnancy prevention for it. They did mention that it was a bit wider, to allow for lower elasticity, but didn’t burst test it.

I still can’t find anyone who’s used any brand of polyurethane condom, so no word on Trojan breakage. Maybe the price is scaring them away.

Sure, I’m all for moderation – as long as it’s not excessive.