One in four persons will contract a Sexually Transmitted Disease in their lifetime–a mind-blowing 25% of the population, with under-25 youth at highest risk. It’s obvious we need to do a better job of encouraging that sex be safe when it does happen– because baby, it’s gonna happen. What does this have to do with marketing? Everything….
* * * * *
This post is about a lot of love. Actually, since we’re talking NYC, it may not always involve love–just a lot of latex. New York hands out 1.5 million free condoms each month, or about 18 million a year. Mayor Bloomberg’s administration has been aggressively increasing the number of free contraceptives in order to decrease the spread of STDs and AIDS.
Currently, more than 100,000 New Yorkers are living with HIV and AIDS, with AIDS the third-leading cause of death among city denizens under 65. Unarguably, those figures are far too high for this day and age.
Now sex is a hot issue. There exist strong leanings and views from all over the spectrum on the giving away of free contraceptives and the message it sends. I find it to be a message of health and I have a hard time wrapping my mind around a moral argument as–when all is said and deeds are done–I find protecting people’s health to not only be of the highest morality but the pinaccle of social responsibility. And, as with other posts I’ve published, I believe socially responsible practices so many times hit squarely in marketers’ domain: a tremendous opportunity we can either greatly effect or altogether neglect.
Folks, free condoms or not, sex is going to happen. Free condoms don’t increase the likelihood of getting hot and heavy; they increase the likelihood of getting hot, heavy and healthy. To be sure, awareness and education initiatives are necessary but, given the numbers, they’re not effective or reliable on their own merits. And with one in four persons contracting an STD before adulthood–a mind-blowing 25% of the population with one in four people unaware they’re HIV-infected–it’s obvious we need to do a better job of encouraging that sex be safe when it does happen–because baby, it’s gonna happen (psst: it’s happening right now).
What does this have to do with marketing? Everything. Where is all this sexy talk coming from? Impressive marketing strategies that my own city is implementing; a two-pronged approach that I refer to like so:
And, ever since 2002, the distribution of free contraceptives per person has significantly increased. NYC Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden found out organizations were limiting the number given out to each person. Finding that preposterous, he made it unlimited, along with the ease of re-ordering online (only organizations, not individuals can order them electronically). That’s e-condom fulfillment made easy.
Soon, this fair city will hail an official condom: yep, we’ll have a city-sanctioned love glove. One idea is a subway theme with maps on the wrappers. Talk about double utility. My money is on these becoming must-have collectibles and popping-up all over eBay. But, like books, I’ll get them for you guys for free. Yes, I’m kidding.
My own suggestion for NYC-branded condom copy that I’ll submitting to the Mayor’s office? “I heart NY…and tonight, I heart you.” Do hope they take me up on it; it’s for a good cause and would make for a most interesting portfolio piece.
Now what kind of marketer would I be if I didn’t listen to you guys: if you would like to suggest your own line of copy for the wrappers, just leave it in the comments and I’ll include them with my own (I’ll credit each person for their contribution). City Hall hasn’t asked for suggestions, mind you, but I know they’ll appreciate the free recommedations from smart marketers embracing a socially responsible cause. Remember, it must have a NY slant; so it can be bold–hmm, one could say ballsy (!)–but within limits, kids.
Sexy-Sex Disclaimer: I’ve not previously published any posts involving sex; I hope I did not offend any readers. My intent is promoting socially responsible strategies as I can think of no better use of our craft than in devising clever ways to solve problems and save lives. Plus I figured you readers could use a break from all my talk about the Book Club (though I contend books are very sexy subject matter, too 
.
in many parts of the world there a burden called religion which do not allow to face pragmatically the issue of the sex related disease. no matter the name, apparently the only really linking topic between various religions is to ban sex or at least not to talk about.
i do live in rome which is one of the sexiest city in the world but just don’t tell it.
Hi CK – Part of the problem with any safe sex campaign is that you cannot make safe sex any easier or more attractive than run-of-the-mill sex. Therefore, any attempt to introduce an element of safety, unless it actually makes the act of sex more enjoyable, it is a barrier that, in a primal sense, is difficult to overcome. Since sex is such an instinctive thing, I’m not convinced that clever marketers and politicians (*shudder*) are even capable of making sex, with the additional aforementioned barriers, any more sexy than it already is.
Lacking any visual manifestation of infection, people tend to assume “unprotected” sex is “safe,” regardless of what they’re taught in or out of school. Their everyday consumable media (TV, movies) tell them very little about “protection.”
In my mind, the best way to prevent the escalation of STD among the populous is to ensure people have transcendent urges that are superior to their basic instincts. The most effective methods of accomplishing this are not palatable to contemporary sensitivities.
I don’t think there’s a single solution that will work best for everyone, but should the level reach epidemic proportions because we did not assume responsibility for our own actions, you can be certain that there are forces who will seek take the decision to comply or not comply out of our hands (or our wallets, as the case may be). Whatever the differences may be between the various parties offering solutions in this whole mess, they can agree wholeheartedly that no one wants that.
For NYC, I suppose doing something is better than doing nothing. But for a contrarian perspective, I wonder what would happen if NYC took that $2-3 million a year it spends on condoms and instead marketed a rubber bracelet, similar to Lance Armstrong’s “Livestrong” circlet, that said “Save IT for Marriage”…
“If you can make it HERE, you’ll make it anywhere”
Moving on, interesting to read the old case study and article about condom marketing in Thailand and Axe Body spray’s campaign there.
Similar problems, significant cultural push back, no budget, creativity and branding, etc.
Unless the act has changed since I was a young man (after 32 years of marriage, I think my wife and I are safe), the last thing going through my mind was concern about STDs. All I could think was, “My God. We’re doin’ it!”
Oh my goodness!!! Wow! Men!!!
STD’s should be on the top of the mind of every person engaging in sex. Even if your married. I’ve seen daytime TV and how many cheaters there are out there.
CK, I’m with you! And maybe the bulk of the marketing should be targeted at women. Clearly we are the only ones that can have the presence of mind to make him put the thing on.
It is totally unrealistic to expect someone to take the higher moral ground. Plastic bracelets!!! Yeah that’s gonna stop ‘em.
Get over the barrier thing guys. HHmmm I could put on a condom or I could die. Duh!
How many of you that have commented here are in the highest risk zone? I thought so–Think for a moment you have a son who’s 18 and you have taught him to abstain and to take responsibility for himself. And along comes Suzy Hotty. What’s that you said Lewis… “My God. We’re doin’ it!” Yeah he’s doin’ it!
In this backward society of pent-up moral high ground freaks that end up on the news for underage porn abuse, it is especially important to distribute condoms. Hand them out in schools, bars, subways, prisons, restaurants, and old folks homes.
No one is going to foot the bill for education because no one is going to agree on what should be taught. If you have a condom in your wallet it’s going to remind you of what you should do.
Put on a condom or die! That’s my vote for a slogan.
Condom social marketing is the granddaddy of all social marketing programs, having been refined internationally over decades by USAID and other NGO-funded programs. I think you’ve hit on two key elements that will help to make this successful. Accessibility is crucial, and having an attractive brand that appeals to the audience they most need to reach is the other key. While it’s fun to come up with cute slogans (“for the Big Apple’s big bananas,” “Safe Sex in the City”?), I hope the city has or will conduct research to learn how best to position the brand to be most effective. Whether it’s the concept of protecting yourself, being in control of your fate, showing your partner you care about them, being a real man, or being a responsible member of the community — the most salient motivator should drive the development of the branding effort.
It’s a hard sell to make using a condom sexy. But there are other needs and desires that they can tap into from a different angle to be effective.
Thanks to all you (sexy) commenters:
. But NYC is a bubble…a raging, liberal bubble…so I doubt that tactic would take hold (again, just being realistic amid the stats) but I appreciate the bracelet creativity and will include that with the recommendations for sure.
Gianandrea: Yes, sex (and safe sex) are very controversial topics; no question. But the public’s health needs to be separate. Easier said than done for sure. Might you be able to track down STD stats in Roma? Being a “like” city to NYC, I’d be interested in the stats and Roma’s safe sex initiatives.
Cam: Great points, as usual. One thing my campus did when I was in college was to bring in a comedienne that had a great act around “Hot, Sexy and Safer”. She was enjoyable and “real” and the school was able to show (via their medical center) less STD and pregnancy cases the following year. It was educational but “branded” and the school started giving out free contraceptives (and it was a christian-affiliated school so that was HUGE for them). My point is that it was a different, “sexy” way to address the issue. I’ll be following the NYC STD stats over the coming years to see if the approaches I reference above are working.
Paul: Thanks for your view; I completely respect it
Stephen: Very good. I’m chuckling as I write this.
Lewis: You’re funny. The act has not changed (ha!) but the stats on STDs have soared, and HIV-AIDS has entered the picture…that’s the difference (that makes all the difference).
Tammy – Were it only true… But typical condom usage isn’t anywhere near to 100% effective against STDs, so the slogan, while catchy in its own way, is misleading.
Plus, the instinctual nature of sex and the human need for attachment typically overrides ones’ sense of propriety for ones’ own benefit (which is partially why we’re in this predicament now). Convincing others that THEY could get an STD is challenging. I’ve even known too many people who 1) didn’t know and didn’t think they had an STD, and had sex without condoms (because of the condoms’ drawbacks and in spite of the risks) 2) had sex in spite of knowing they or their partner had an STD (without a condom), and 3) contracted an STD IN SPITE of wearing a condom. It’s maddening to think about, but these aren’t uneducated people. Just inherently selfish.
And let’s face it, folks, sex for the sake of the pleasure is, by definition, a hedonistic impulse that nearly everyone shares, universally. It is an impulse society (generally) encourages and embraces. Psychologically, telling people to restrict that impulse in any way or fashion while in the same breath extolling the inherent enjoyability of its several manifestations is contradictory. Thus, “Have sex, but play it safe” is a very confusing message for people who are most likely to be targeted — that is, people in their sexual primes.
For those reasons, I think we have to do one of several things… And I realize that not all of these are possible.
In no particular order:
1) Invent a cheap and effective condom that makes sex exponentially more pleasurable for both parties.
2) Appeal to people’s sense of responsibility (towards society or towards their partners).
3) Appeal to their sense of virtue, and the different ways this could lead to more transcendent happiness than physical pleasures alone.
The fear angle you talk about, Tammy, will work on some, and the comedic angle you mentioned, CK, will work on others, but there is a big problem in getting a working message to the right audience without corrupting the message other audiences are getting, that might work better for them.
Number 1 would get the greatest number of people to use condoms, but if we really had it, I wonder if human beings would choose to procreate at all.
Given the primal nature of sex and the combined mentality of the age group we talking about, I suppose the only answer is a better condom.
Until that day comes I believe that handing out condoms is the most proactive thing that can be done to put the issue directly into the hands of those who are greatest at risk.
Adding a slogan to the packaging can’t hurt either.
A super sensational awesome feeling condom would also cut down on unwanted pregnancies.
Are the condom companies listening?
I should also mention that, with respect to “Put on a condom or die,” people have been having sex without condoms for as long as there have been people, and if polls are right, people are still having sex without condoms, and they’re living just fine. I don’t say that to minimize the problem, but to point out that “Put on a condom or die,” will smack of crying wolf to a population that has an entirely different experience, which thereby reduces the overall perceived credibility of the one promoting the message, regardless of how noble the intent.
It’s a pickle.
Nedra: Thank you for your social marketing insight and fun lines (Carrie and the girls would be proud!). Indeed, the most salient motivator of this–and any branding effort–should be the driving message. I am not sure how many (if more than 1) of the contraceptives will be branded. That’s a great question for the City and I’ll do my best to find that out.
.
Tammy: Thanks so much for your ideas. This is one area where I do believe the condom companies are listening to their audiences (not because of responsibility so much as it means money to them for people to buy their products).
The condom co’s have been producing many types/varieties and improvements over the years but the product still needs to do its job of protecting and that means there will likely never be a perfect condom (or at least one that is not perfect for both parties–as some target female benefits, others hit on male benefits).
Cam: Where to start my friend? You raise many good points. There exist several unique segments that NYC needs to target with the messaging and contraceptives (e.g. teens, persons that are older than teens but can’t afford contraceptives, persons that can afford contraceptives but don’t always exercise safe judgment, etc.).
Undoubtedly, there is an inherent contradiction to the message of “go for it–but safely.” It is a pickle as you say (funny, you). But, I believe that (1) education (some serious, some more entertaining so as to engage) PLUS (2) unlimited availability PLUS (3) savvy/sexy branding will increase usage. Again, it will be interesting to see stats a year from the time the city unleashes all 3 components.
Cam, I’m just not sure if appealing to virtue is realistic. I doubt this, sadly. Responsibility? If “packaged” correctly maybe so. We need to work to make contraceptives part of the process–and getting a product into a process is where marketers’ excel (because we want our products to be part of their regimen). The three-pronged strategy is the best I’ve run across yet for this social issue.
And worry not Cam, people would still procreate even if the perfect condom existed (they need only see your 3 week-old daughter’s sweet face as motivation
Hmm, never a dull moment over here at DF!
Cam makes a good point. The reality is — the vast majority of people know the risks and still choose to have unprotected sex.
I wonder if we take a step away from the most drastic of risks and look instead at the more common but less fatal risks.
How about…
Unless you REALLY love her, wear it.
or…
The price of not wearing this? Child support.
Drew: very creative tactic…the price of unsafe sex is high indeed. So noted!
Creative condom wrapper line for NYC:
Suffication + Stuffication = Studfication
yeah, I know, stick to my day knob
mchale
This is the most amount of comments I’ve ever seen. You sure found a great topic to get ratings!
I personally don’t believe in mass private-labeling condoms, as I am a greater proponent of a name brand I would trust, or whose source I would find credible (city-health authority). As much I believe in the ready availability of condoms, an ueber-presence takes away the remarkable mystique behind it all.
Interesting that many of the commenters are speaking from the perspective of the condoms being used primarily between men and women as a contraceptive. I suspect that the main audience for this initiative is gay men to prevent transmission of HIV. This leads to another important point that the branding of the condoms will be dependent on who the city sees as its primary target audience. If they go fuzzy and try to make it all things to all people, they will be less effective than if they know who they want to reach and target the brand toward them.
CK – Regarding appealing to virtue… I do know (as much as it is knowable) of several cases where this has been a winning strategy, but I don’t even know all of the variables that went into creating such success. I suspect it took meticulous parenting that included close control over the media the child consumed growing up — because we all know what that the media are replete with poor examples of both virtue and “safe” sex, making it difficult for children, adolescents, and some young adults to make important distinctions.
We have to be careful when we take our own experience and those of our friends and project that onto the world at large. I can explain further over email if you want, but as my most effective example is more graphic than I want to post on this board, I’ll leave it at that.
I will say, however, that self-control on account of virtue isn’t completely a lost art. Although, as Tammy pointed out, there are many more cheaters in the world than we would all like, there are still many monogamous marriages out there, in spite of our more primal urges that would draw us elsewhere.
The state does what it can to encourage monogamy in marriages through laws that make it painful to separate, but other than that, I really don’t think the state is in a good position to govern the relationships between two private individuals. Indeed, who the heck wants that, anyway?
Although it will be near impossible to eliminate unsafe sex on one hand or premarital sex on the other, I think the state can at least eliminate or control exposure to the confusing contradiction I mentioned by allowing parents to place their children in schools that reflect their own faith and values – without charging them extra for the maintenance of public schools. Vouchers are not my first choice, but they are, in my opinion, the best choice on the table at the current time.
That way, if parents want their children in a school that promotes safe sex so they don’t have to, they have that freedom. Also, if parents want their children in a school that promotes chastity, they can do that.
None of this will eliminate the problem entirely. Not all children going to parochial schools will be chaste, and not all children going to public schools will use condoms. Why? Because kids will be kids, and they tend to disobey their parents in favor of their own interests from time to time. It’s part of growing up. But at least with the freedom I described, they will at least be able to control to some measure the exposure their children have to messages that might contradict the mores they want to teach their children.
That’s something worth considering for its own sake.
mchale: so noted, very creative.
Mario: I hear you on trusting brand names (that’s what we marketers love to hear), but many of the recipients of the free contraceptives couldn’t otherwise afford, feel comfortable buying, or just not think of getting the contraceptives themelves. Different audience I believe.
Nedra: Yes, this is a great point. The audiences span homosexual and heterosexual users–I’m working to get some clarification from the city on how they segment their audiences for this initiative.
Cam: Yes, projecting our own experiences is dangerous and myopic. I don’t want to think that virtue is a lost art either–it would be ideal if all parents could be in a position to choose which type of school they place their children in. In NYC we’re talking about A LOT of public schools (which have a very good reputation for their curriculum, but they’re not private schools). But where parenting falls short, the city is focusing on health (education and free, unlimited contraceptives).
All: this is certainly not a problem with an easy answer but one I think we marketers can effect favorably. Anybody else want to weigh-in? We’d love to hear from you…
Any move in the direction of saving lives is great. It seems that debating is only going to stall works that will keep people from contracting the disease. There are many messages out there and there will be more coming from various angles. The one that works on one person may indeed not work on another. But if we keep on getting messages out there, different messages, one may stick and that one may be the one that saves my daughter or your son. I’m all for condom giveaways, religious messages, moral high grounds – whatever it takes. It seems a shame that sex could kill, doesn’t it? It’s like falling off a rollercoaster to your death. In any context that stinks to high heaven.
I think they should package them like the candy hearts at Valentines with different sayings on them like “You’re special,” “I love you” “I respect you” “I’m a safety girl” “I’m doing a science project and I need your help” “Yes it’s a large and it does fit” Because if one message doesn’t fit then another one might. One of these messages might cut the conversation about safety by giving NYers a creative presentation to their partner. The condom itself could be the conversation about safety just by being a condom with a message on it presented in the situation at the right time. I realize that doesn’t brand them as a NY condom but I think it would work for a lot of people. It would keep the fun and enhance the mood. It wouldn’t be a serious conversation in the beginning or middle of a passionate one.
Cam, I went to a parochial school and I will admit I knew absolutely nothing about sex. My own mother told me it was something you “have” to do when you’re married. When I began high school I switched to public school and my sister remained in parochial school. I found the girls in public school were proud of their virginity while at my sister’s school there were 9 pregnant girls in her graduating class. We had sex education at the public school. Maybe the parochial schools of today have some kind of curriculum addressing the perils of sex.
The only person that is responsible for teaching children about sex is their parents. All too many avoid the issue and rely on schools to inform their child.
As far as “put this on or die” I was thinking more along the lines of Nedra’s comment about homosexual men. I had many gay friends, from the 80’s, that died from AIDs. Those that made it through those carefree times are those that chose safe sex or they were very lucky. The 90’s were a grim time for many gay men in the U.S. and ‘wear a condom or die’ was very top of mind and I’m guessing still is in NYC – FREE condoms – woo hoo. Of course it’s not fool proof! Unfortunately there is a segment of that population that is secretly hoping to contract AIDs and die. Reckless individuals with no self-worth that have probably contemplated suicide many times. I knew some gay men like that. Keyword: knew.
Enter other minority groups and the “above-it-all” majority into the mix, and we have a whole new epidemic of careless sexually active individuals. I say let them have condoms.
Put a fun message on it or a fear based message on it. And as mchale pointed out, people should go for a brand they trust. That would be great, but I think we are really talking about heightening awareness. Hell they should use condoms as confetti at parades. I’m being facetious of course. This is not a campaign to create greater tourism to NYC nor is it to offend the religious or the high-brow. It is about public safety and it is a humanitarian effort to save lives and get people to be aware of the risks.
I say rock on CK! Great topic and great motivation.
Ditto Michelle!
I’d like to say thank you to everyone for an entertaining, enlightening, and civil discourse on a difficult issue.
Tammy – Thank you in particular. Now when are you going to start your own blog?
“But if we keep on getting messages out there, different messages, one may stick and that one may be the one that saves my daughter or your son.”
.
Michelle: thanks for your good insight in the quote above. As with any marketing effort, we do need to test messages (since apparently the current ones aren’t producing the success rates we need). And as Nedra pointed out early on we need to define the targets. I also love (!) your idea of packaging them like Valentine’s Candy Hearts. Very creative; kudos.
Tammy: NYC needs your enthusiasm–as your passion is terrific.
Cam: Yes, we can debate in a civil manner the tough issues–and produce ideas that work to solve some mighty complex, important issues.
And thanks to Ann Handley for embracing ALL types of discussions, even on ‘hot’ topics (warning: I’m going to want to bring more into the fray–but always with a marketing lesson/angle, of course
Open to more feedback…
Without getting too deep into the great discussion going on here, I’m going to weigh in with two directions:
1. Safe in the city
2. New York Copulation
Reading them, however, doesn’t do these lines justice. Check out some rough designs: http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=106
I’ll email them to you, CK!
Mark: These are terrific and fun! Thanks for taking the idea one step further and concepting designs around them (and thanks to Ryan for his design savvy). Great, clever thinking. We need clever in solving complex issues.
So let me see if I got this: Back in the Garden of Eden, Eve was offering Adam the Big Apple?
Maybe the condoms could be sold with a slogan:
“Give in to the Big Apple of Temptation”
ChrisB
Chris: Blame it on Eve! Brilliant idea, indeed (I know Eve is in fact smiling over this one. Adam is still a bit miffed.)
If we wanted to hit on the safety message a bit more we could go this route:
“Give in (safely) to the BIG Apple of Temptation.”
What a great conversation and such an important issue. One of the most powerful social campaigns of late (for me at least) was the Live Strong cancer awareness campaign.
A possible angle is to play off of that campaign with “Live Long”. (Yes it’s a double entendre, all the better.)
The sex films of porn and Hellywood never show anybody putting on a condom.
Sex without consequences, without pregnancy, without STDs, a pure fantasy world and fantasy is the sworn enemy of reality and truth.
Condom message: “This doesn’t mean I love you.”
“Take this off and it’s over.”
“My full frontal foreskin”
Well, being that it needs to cover safe sex for New Yorkers–how about a condom wrapper with the subway line/car logo, and the copy: “The Safest Ride in NYC.”
CK the comment about some kind of condom bracelet “saving it” and making a comparison to Lance Armstrong’s bracelets is pretty lame. The Lance bracelets are a fund raising device for cancer research. Spouting feel good slogans really doesn’t compare. Cutting out the condoms and making abstinance bracelets really begs the question what is the fundraising for?
Filchyboy, don’t take what I said that literally. I didn’t mean a bracelet, no fundraising, not cutting anything out. Just the slogan ‘Live Long’ on condom wrappers. I should have been more clear.
CK … you love a controversial topic don’t you?!
You could take the title from Seth Godin’s “Free Prize Inside”. But perhaps that would be a special condom designed for marketers. Unfortunately, it could be also be confused with “All marketers are liars” brand. And we wouldn’t want that would we?
Gavin: I love a topic that pushes a good issue and engages clever marketers– on those counts I’m guilty as charged
. Thanks for the two ideas.
Matt: Filchyboy wasn’t referencing your idea, just FYI.
Vaspers: You’re so bad…I do love your “tattoo” idea, funny!
Rebecca: I LOVE your idea….wish I’d thought of it (hee, hee).
For my first post on this thread, I said this:
“I don’t think there’s a single solution that will work best for everyone, but should the level reach epidemic proportions because we did not assume responsibility for our own actions, you can be certain that there are forces who will seek take the decision to comply or not comply out of our hands (or our wallets, as the case may be).”
It appears the wheels were already turning.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16891832/
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if similar vaccines were being developed for other STDs. No condom required.
As evidence by the lively discussion and number of posts… sex sells.
I would argue we can only be “cute” about changing public attitude. There has to be a huge common value that is about to be destroyed in order to change public attitude and then behavior.
Death? Happens to other people.
“Last Bang can kill you”
I just don’t see people changing their behavior and the threat of epidemic rings as hollow as the matra of global warming. It takes more than being cute to change attitude and behavior.
Jon: It does take more than being cute–it takes (1)education, (2)availability and (3)creativity. Those approaches are what I was referencing in my post. That’s not to say it won’t take more…but it’s a lot more than what has been done to date (at least in NYC).
I’ve always said that “guilting” people is useless as that’s gone in a NY minute–we have enough to be guilty about. When you get creative and make solutions easier is when we start to see higher success rates–and in this case I’m hoping lower STD/AIDS rates.
All: I have FINALLY found a very nice contact at City Hall/Dept. of Health! I have been bounced around the Mayor’s Office but succeeded in finding the right contact.
. Stay tuned…I wouldn’t leave you smart marketers hanging!
They’re very busy this week but are working to get some chat time for me in the near future to address a lot of these great questions above–and they thank us for our original condom one-liners
An easier way to prevent aids and STD’s is simply not to do it.
Comon, learn to control yourselves!
Hyy u all people..
here the information about tubal reversal..
The two open ends of the tube are joined together with several very tiny sutures placed at 90-degree intervals around the circumference of the tube. At this point the sutures are placed only for position, not tied. The ends of the tube are perfectly aligned using sutures that are thinner than the diameter of a human hair and extremely high-power surgical magnification. Each suture is then permanently tied until the inner layer of the two open ends of the fallopian tube are connected, creating the tubal reversal’s connection.
For more inforamtion check our link…