A broken condom is never a reason to ROFL. Unless you’re the Molecular and Cell Biology graduate students at UC Berkeley who dictate the gratuitous ROFL-age at NCBI ROFL. Their recent post Those are the [condom] breaks highlights the “laboratory coital model” used to test condom breakage in a PubMed.gov study enlighteningly titled “Male condoms that break in use do so mostly by a “blunt puncture” mechanism.” But after one look at the study text and all I have to say is:
“Over a period of 7 years, broken condoms returned to a supplier (SSL, Durex) via consumer complaints were examined to determine the cause of failure.”
WTF?
Who returns condoms. And — why, gods, why!?
{ 5 comments }
“Who returns condoms” lol lol lol i love america you ppl are crazy
To improve them for others… it’s an icky, practical altruistic action…
That’s a pretty round orifice there. Must be simulating anal sex.
PubMed is just an aggregator of papers. This article was published in the Elsevier journal Contraception.
hahaha, I dunno. Personally I peel what’s left off, toss it on the floor and suit up again. No need to stop now.
Comments on this entry are closed.