Abstinence only teaching less effective at preventing sex than comprehensive

[Chairboy]

An interesting study:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23782717/

Apparently, abstinence-only education seems to be less effective at preventing/delaying sex than a normal comprehensive sex-ed education.  This sounds consistent with what I'd expect, but I suspect there may be some here that find this information troubling/perplexing.

Using data from a 2002 national survey, researchers found that among more than 1,700 unmarried, heterosexual teens between 15 and 19 years old, those who'd received comprehensive sex ed in school were 60 percent less likely to have been pregnant or gotten someone pregnant than teens who'd had no formal sex education.

Meanwhile, there was no clear benefit from abstinence-only education in preventing pregnancy or delaying sexual intercourse, the researchers report in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

[SD67]

That sounds about right. The "Don't do it" method worked for me too. Anything I was told not to do but was not given any decent information about I immediately tried to see what all the fuss was about!
This method also worked for:
Don't smoke
Don't drink
Don't do drugs
Don't shoplift
Don't read/watch pr0n
Don't play with explosives

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Abstinence only parents are the kind that blush when talked about it and forbid anyone from educating the kids. They might get downright mad if someone tries. They just forbid it - which teenagers will not obey anyway.

It's not surprising.

[C(Sea)Bass]

My parents style worked.
They said "do whatever you want, but if you get some girl pregnant we ain't paying for S***"

and, AFAIK, I never got anyone pregnant.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Nowadays they need one of these anyway:

[C(Sea)Bass]

Im flattered, really, but its not quite that big

[Mini D]

The study found that teens who'd been through abstinence-only programs were less likely than those who'd received no sex ed to have been pregnant. However, the difference was not significant in statistical terms, which means the finding could have been due to chance.

Statistical insignificance a result of chance.

While comprehensive sex ed did not clearly reduce the STD risk, there was a modest, but statistically insignificant reduced risk of engaging in sex. The abstinence-only approach had no effect on either factor, the researchers found.

Statistical insignificance is proof.

[lazs2]

This should be obvious to everyone by looking at history...

Now that we have sex education by the indocrtrinization centers...  we only have about 80% of the girls getting pregnant and only 1 in four with STD's.

Back 40 years ago or so when there was no sex education at the centers...  why it must have been like... what?  90 or 100% with everyone dripping and oozing with STD's.

Did you guys ever think that the schools and the lefties have screwed things up so bad that no program of any kind will work at this point?

I say live and let live.. no ones sex life is any of my business but..   children?   

lazs

[Chairboy]

80% of school girls getting pregnant?  Which cavity are you pulling these looney numbers from?

[lazs2]

sooo.. would you say that more or less little girls are getting pregnant now than 40 or 50 years ago before sex education in the socialist schools?

How bout them nasty STD's huh?   bad deal there..  one in four is the latest study.   

lazs

[Chairboy]

It's quite a bit less, actually:


This is from http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/09/12/USTPstats.pdf



kthxbai

[midnight Target]

Gosh durn libruls and their gosh durn numbers!

[myelo]

Facts pffftttt! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.

[lasersailor184]

Umm, you guys do know how to read, right?  I have to assume that you do because this is a message board, but you guys are trying your darndest to prove that you don't.

First off, what Chairboy quotes says that Sexual Education is better than NO sexual education.  It mentions nothing about Abstinence, but read into it what you want.

The rest of the article goes on to say that the findings between everything else are not statistically significant to have a valid conclusion.




The ONLY conclusion is that Sex Ed is better than Sex Ed.  Nothing was concluded about Abstinence programs.

[wrongwayric]

What's sex? In the high school i went to, this was 1977-1981 time frame, they had a pretty simple moto. "Sex Ed is better than Sex With Ed". There opinion being teach them and let them know what the consequences where. I think also that telling a child/teen straight out not to do something but not explaining why is just plain stupid. You want to scare kids into wearing condoms show them the same STD film they showed us in the marines. I've got a strong stomache and i almost hurled.