![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
File under: D for DUH!
Dec. 1st, 2006 01:31 pmThe headlines are just starting to hit Google News, having already shown up on Shakespeare's Sister:
'Birth control not abstinence' stemming teen pregnancy: Daily Mail - UK
Teens avoid pregnancy, but not sex: New York Daily News, NY
US sex-abstinence drive 'flawed': BBC News
Birth control credited with drop in teen pregnancy: Reuters.uk
Contraception Driving US Decline in Teen Pregnancies: Forbes, NY
Decline in Teen Pregnancies with better use of contraception: SpiritIndia, India
What they are all talking about is the the study, which was conducted by researchers at Columbia University and the Alan Guttmacher Institute...published in the Nov. 30 online issue of the American Journal of Public Health. In this study, which tracked the lowering teen birthrate via data from "the ongoing National Survey of Family Growth," it was discovered that 86 percent of the decline in pregnancy was associated with increased use of contraception.... Only 14 percent of the decline in pregnancy was attributed to reductions in teens' sexual activity.
Based on their findings, the researchers believe that contraception may be the best way to further reduce the number of teens getting pregnant.
"Abstinence promotion is a worthwhile goal, particularly among younger teenagers; however, the scientific evidence shows that, in itself, it is insufficient to help adolescents prevent unintended pregnancies," the researchers wrote. (Citation from article linked above, emphasis added.)
But please note, however, who is doing the talking in the headlines above - not a lot of American coverage, is there? I wonder if the local papers are waiting for a furious rebuttal quote from the abstinence fans or if they're just going to quietly look the other way on the statistics.
And yet, despite the resistance of the abstinence-only programs to providing hard facts and numbers, this is yet more proof that said facts can be found, and they're almost universally in direct opposite to the claims of the keep-your-knees-together crowd. The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States reports: To date, six studies of abstinence-only programs have been published. None of these studies found consistent and significant program effects on delaying the onset of intercourse, and at least one study provided strong evidence that the program did not delay the onset of intercourse. Thus, the weight of evidence indicates that these abstinence-only programs do not delay the onset of intercourse.
A study of 7,326 seventh and eighth graders in California who participated in an abstinence-only program found that the program did not have a measurable impact upon either sexual or contraceptive behaviors.
Nearly two-thirds of teenagers think teaching "Just Say No" is an ineffective deterrent to teenage sexual activity.
The National Institutes of Health's Consensus Panel on AIDS said in February 1997 that the abstinence-only approach to sexuality education "places policy in direct conflict with science and ignores overwhelming evidence that other programs (are) effective.
And America's usual dodge, which seems to be that if you can't moralize something into law here, go enforce it elsewhere in the world (see: Gag rule) is also getting a little battered at the edges. Several members of Congress, such as Rep. Christopher Shays (R., Conn.), have questioned the rationale behind what they perceive as an arbitrary conservative requirement in the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to spend one third of HIV/AIDS prevention funds on 'abstinence until marriage' and 'be faithful to a single partner' programs (AB).
Furthermore General Accountability Office (GAO) testimony released Sept. 6 says the requirement has actually hindered local aid teams' ability to respond adequately to local needs in the affected countries.
Considering the inability of the Moral Minority to legislate their own genitilia into adherence to their stated principles (see: Foley and Haggard), it was ludicrous for them to to assume that they could sweep into everyone else's bedroom to do the job for us.
And you do realize that that is the next step? That there is discussion of using tax money to extend abstinence training, somehow or other, to adults? I'd shred that too, except that Mark Morford of the San Francisco Gazette has done that with more panache and snark than I ever could:
The latest pitiable GOP plan, from what I can tell, goes something like this: To make the remaining Bush administration proposals and doctrines and cultural stratagems so outlandish and silly and degrading and insulting to your mind, heart and your very own beleaguered genitalia that you cannot help but laugh and cringe and sit back and go, "Oh my God these people have got to be kidding." ... It is the only viable explanation. It is the only way to account for something like, say, the latest twist in the Abstinence Education Program from Bush's increasingly laughable Department of Health and Human Services, a $50 million slice of embarrassing government detritus that is now actually encouraging all states to tell their single, youngish residents that they should -- how to put this so you don't shoot coffee through your nose? -- that everyone should avoid sex entirely until they turn 30.
It's for real. It's an actual HHS dictum and there are people who actually believe it should be adhered to, and I'm right now guessing you broke this rule this very morning and if you didn't, you really, really wanted to, and if you're older than 30 and/or married, chances are you are sitting there right now wishing you were still single and/or younger than 30 just one more time just so you could squishily, juicily break that rule again, oh my God yes please. Just a guess.
Ah, abstinence education. Could there be a more dizzy, glaring example of a first-rate BushCo failure? Could there be a more insulting, demeaning program, the sole intention of which appears to be to deceive humanity and undermine every succulent human impulse and shove sexuality back into the 1850s and induce 10 million teens to resent and mistrust adults even more than they already do?
Since I'm at work, I can't surf to give you this last link to sum this post up, so I'll leave you with this advice when you're not on a company computer: Google - lyrics "Camille West" "Nobody Beats My BOB"
'Birth control not abstinence' stemming teen pregnancy: Daily Mail - UK
Teens avoid pregnancy, but not sex: New York Daily News, NY
US sex-abstinence drive 'flawed': BBC News
Birth control credited with drop in teen pregnancy: Reuters.uk
Contraception Driving US Decline in Teen Pregnancies: Forbes, NY
Decline in Teen Pregnancies with better use of contraception: SpiritIndia, India
What they are all talking about is the the study, which was conducted by researchers at Columbia University and the Alan Guttmacher Institute...published in the Nov. 30 online issue of the American Journal of Public Health. In this study, which tracked the lowering teen birthrate via data from "the ongoing National Survey of Family Growth," it was discovered that 86 percent of the decline in pregnancy was associated with increased use of contraception.... Only 14 percent of the decline in pregnancy was attributed to reductions in teens' sexual activity.
Based on their findings, the researchers believe that contraception may be the best way to further reduce the number of teens getting pregnant.
"Abstinence promotion is a worthwhile goal, particularly among younger teenagers; however, the scientific evidence shows that, in itself, it is insufficient to help adolescents prevent unintended pregnancies," the researchers wrote. (Citation from article linked above, emphasis added.)
But please note, however, who is doing the talking in the headlines above - not a lot of American coverage, is there? I wonder if the local papers are waiting for a furious rebuttal quote from the abstinence fans or if they're just going to quietly look the other way on the statistics.
And yet, despite the resistance of the abstinence-only programs to providing hard facts and numbers, this is yet more proof that said facts can be found, and they're almost universally in direct opposite to the claims of the keep-your-knees-together crowd. The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States reports: To date, six studies of abstinence-only programs have been published. None of these studies found consistent and significant program effects on delaying the onset of intercourse, and at least one study provided strong evidence that the program did not delay the onset of intercourse. Thus, the weight of evidence indicates that these abstinence-only programs do not delay the onset of intercourse.
A study of 7,326 seventh and eighth graders in California who participated in an abstinence-only program found that the program did not have a measurable impact upon either sexual or contraceptive behaviors.
Nearly two-thirds of teenagers think teaching "Just Say No" is an ineffective deterrent to teenage sexual activity.
The National Institutes of Health's Consensus Panel on AIDS said in February 1997 that the abstinence-only approach to sexuality education "places policy in direct conflict with science and ignores overwhelming evidence that other programs (are) effective.
And America's usual dodge, which seems to be that if you can't moralize something into law here, go enforce it elsewhere in the world (see: Gag rule) is also getting a little battered at the edges. Several members of Congress, such as Rep. Christopher Shays (R., Conn.), have questioned the rationale behind what they perceive as an arbitrary conservative requirement in the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to spend one third of HIV/AIDS prevention funds on 'abstinence until marriage' and 'be faithful to a single partner' programs (AB).
Furthermore General Accountability Office (GAO) testimony released Sept. 6 says the requirement has actually hindered local aid teams' ability to respond adequately to local needs in the affected countries.
Considering the inability of the Moral Minority to legislate their own genitilia into adherence to their stated principles (see: Foley and Haggard), it was ludicrous for them to to assume that they could sweep into everyone else's bedroom to do the job for us.
And you do realize that that is the next step? That there is discussion of using tax money to extend abstinence training, somehow or other, to adults? I'd shred that too, except that Mark Morford of the San Francisco Gazette has done that with more panache and snark than I ever could:
The latest pitiable GOP plan, from what I can tell, goes something like this: To make the remaining Bush administration proposals and doctrines and cultural stratagems so outlandish and silly and degrading and insulting to your mind, heart and your very own beleaguered genitalia that you cannot help but laugh and cringe and sit back and go, "Oh my God these people have got to be kidding." ... It is the only viable explanation. It is the only way to account for something like, say, the latest twist in the Abstinence Education Program from Bush's increasingly laughable Department of Health and Human Services, a $50 million slice of embarrassing government detritus that is now actually encouraging all states to tell their single, youngish residents that they should -- how to put this so you don't shoot coffee through your nose? -- that everyone should avoid sex entirely until they turn 30.
It's for real. It's an actual HHS dictum and there are people who actually believe it should be adhered to, and I'm right now guessing you broke this rule this very morning and if you didn't, you really, really wanted to, and if you're older than 30 and/or married, chances are you are sitting there right now wishing you were still single and/or younger than 30 just one more time just so you could squishily, juicily break that rule again, oh my God yes please. Just a guess.
Ah, abstinence education. Could there be a more dizzy, glaring example of a first-rate BushCo failure? Could there be a more insulting, demeaning program, the sole intention of which appears to be to deceive humanity and undermine every succulent human impulse and shove sexuality back into the 1850s and induce 10 million teens to resent and mistrust adults even more than they already do?
Since I'm at work, I can't surf to give you this last link to sum this post up, so I'll leave you with this advice when you're not on a company computer: Google - lyrics "Camille West" "Nobody Beats My BOB"
