Is anyone really surprised by this?

[Saya]

Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.

The new analysis of data from a large federal survey found that more than half of youths became sexually active before marriage regardless of whether they had taken a "virginity pledge," but that the percentage who took precautions against pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases was 10 points lower for pledgers than for non-pledgers.

"Taking a pledge doesn't seem to make any difference at all in any sexual behavior," said Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, whose report appears in the January issue of the journal Pediatrics. "But it does seem to make a difference in condom use and other forms of birth control that is quite striking."

encouraging abstinence until marriage, including those that specifically ask students to publicly declare their intention to remain virgins. The new analysis, however, goes beyond earlier analyses by focusing on teens who had similar values about sex and other issues before they took a virginity pledge.

"Previous studies would compare a mixture of apples and oranges," Rosenbaum said. "I tried to pull out the apples and compare only the apples to other apples."

The findings are reigniting the debate about the effectiveness of abstinence-focused sexual education just as Congress and the new Obama administration are about to reconsider the more than $176 million in annual funding for such programs.

"This study again raises the issue of why the federal government is continuing to invest in abstinence-only programs," said Sarah Brown of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. "What have we gained if we only encourage young people to delay sex until they are older, but then when they do become sexually active — and most do well before marriage — they don't protect themselves or their partners?"

'Get real about sex education'
James Wagoner of the advocacy group Advocates for Youth agreed: "The Democratic Congress needs to get its head out of the sand and get real about sex education in America."

Proponents of such programs, however, dismissed the study as flawed and argued that programs that focus on abstinence go much further than simply asking youths to make a one-time promise to remain virgins.

"It is remarkable that an author who employs rigorous research methodology would then compromise those standards by making wild, ideologically tainted and inaccurate analysis regarding the content of abstinence education programs," said Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association.

Rosenbaum analyzed data collected by the federal government's National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which gathered detailed information from a representative sample of about 11,000 students in grades seven through 12 in 1995, 1996 and 2001.

Although researchers have analyzed data from that survey before to examine abstinence education programs, the new study is the first to use a more stringent method to account for other factors that could influence the teens' behavior, such as their attitudes about sex before they took the pledge.

100 variables
Rosenbaum focused on about 3,400 students who had not had sex or taken a virginity pledge in 1995. She compared 289 students who were 17 years old on average in 1996, when they took a virginity pledge, with 645 who did not take a pledge but were otherwise similar. She based that judgment on about 100 variables, including their attitudes and their parents' attitudes about sex and their perception of their friends' attitudes about sex and birth control.

"This study came about because somebody who decides to take a virginity pledge tends to be different from the average American teenager. The pledgers tend to be more religious. They tend to be more conservative. They tend to be less positive about sex. There are some striking differences," Rosenbaum said. "So comparing pledgers to all non-pledgers doesn't make a lot of sense."

By 2001, Rosenbaum found, 82 percent of those who had taken a pledge had retracted their promises, and there was no significant difference in the proportion of students in both groups who had engaged in any type of sexual activity, including giving or receiving oral sex, vaginal intercourse, the age at which they first had sex, or their number of sexual partners. More than half of both groups had engaged in various types of sexual activity, had an average of about three sexual partners and had had sex for the first time by age 21 even if they were unmarried.

"It seems that pledgers aren't really internalizing the pledge," Rosenbaum said. "Participating in a program doesn't appear to be motivating them to change their behavior. It seems like abstinence has to come from an individual conviction rather than participating in a program."

'Negative views about condoms'
While there was no difference in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases in the two groups, the percentage of students who reported condom use was about 10 points lower for those who had taken the pledge, and they were about 6 percentage points less likely to use any form of contraception. For example, about 24 percent of those who had taken a pledge said they always used a condom, compared with about 34 percent of those who had not.

Rosenbaum attributed the difference to what youths learn about condoms in abstinence-focused programs.

"There's been a lot of work that has found that teenagers who take part in abstinence-only education have more negative views about condoms," she said. "They tend not to give accurate information about condoms and birth control."

But Huber disputed that charge.

"Abstinence education programs provide accurate information on the level of protection offered through the typical use of condoms and contraception," she said. "Students understand that while condoms may reduce the risk of infection and/or pregnancy, they do not remove the risk."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28415602/

[Albert Mond]

Reminds me of the "revelation" a few years ago that Japan was capable of making Nuclear weapons.

[Despanan]

Would Japan's bombs be smaller and more efficient?

[PortraitOfSanity]

Yes, and they would project sexy neon lights onto the ground to give you a nifty show before you die...

[Renatus]

Also they would make sure that the electo magnetic pulse from the bomb would leave all Japanese produced electronics unharmed.

[Sanguine Heart]

The sex doesn't surprise me, it's the fact that they're less likely to use a condom or some other form of birth control.

[CptSternn]

Shocked! Shocked I say!

It's like those pledges they had when I was in school about not drinking until you are 21. Everyone took one (well, a few of us didn't on principle alone), but the majority of the masses do it because it seems like the right thing to do, and you don't want to piss off the teachers, your parents, etc by saying you plan on engaging in such behaviour.

That being said the first opportunity most people had they drank. Same thing here. People are celibate until the right opportunity presents itself then TO HELL with the pledge, I'm getting laid tonight!

...the fact they made the pledge makes them more likely to be unprepared (hard to make a celibate pledge then go get condoms, birth control pills, or other contraceptives and still claim your making an effort to stay chaste).

They already showed that in areas where 'abstinence only' programmes were introduced (mainly the south, and in Texas - all put in place by the bush administration and its supporters) these areas have the highest amount of teen pregnancies and STDs.

Convincing a teen not to have sex is much like putting a juicy steak on the floor and telling a dog not to eat it. You might be able to stop it if you stare at it constantly, but sooner or later we all know the inevitable outcome.

The only kids who successfully participate in such programmes are kids who usually are not popular, not attractive, and who don't get invited to parties or have encounters which could lead to sexual activity to begin with (i.e. the kids who would be celibate or sober anyway). Granted, there is a small less than 1% who might be an exception to this, but very, very few would fall into that category.

Given the right opportunity, they are going to eat that steak.

[Kraven de Sade]

People actually take such pledges?

[Drake Dun]

Bill Maher is fucking great on this one...

http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=e24fYOXzk1I

He's talking about a similar news story from years ago.

[Alatariel]

I took that pledge...and it was true...I didn't use any kind of condoms or birth control or whatever until I was much more "informed" about sex. (I had abstinance only sex ed/or it just wasn't talked about.)

So, yeah...><

[Pineapple_Juice]

Fuck it. If you're so retarded you're not going to use protection then you deserve all the STD's you get.

[Alatariel]

Originally Posted by Pineapple_Juice

Fuck it. If you're so retarded you're not going to use protection then you deserve all the STD's you get.

I agree. I was just saying that there may be a truth to the statistics.

I was lucky that I didn't get any STD's...but I think that there should be more than "abstinance only" from parents and from the schools.

[Pineapple_Juice]

I didn't mean you specifically. Abstinence-only sex ed is a joke.

[Fae-wolf]

thank goodness my school didn't have to take those pledges. TO me, it only makes certain children want it more.

[Mealla]

The plain truth of the matter is biologically, teenagers are at their sexual prime. As hormonal as they are, they will engage in sex if presented with the opportunity. No, humans aren't slaves to their biology, but most teenagers and college students don't really have a problem with sex, unless it is a psychological issue from brainwashing to believe it's wrong at an early age. Sex is something completely natural, and abstinence only education is detrimental because teenagers wind up misinformed or uninformed.

While I think encouraging masturbation could potentially keep some teens from engaging in sex with other people, that's usually also a no-no to the people who run these programs, and is flat out not discussed or is discouraged as well, which gives kids no alternative place to direct their horniness. I strongly support thoroughly educating kids because I know from experience, and it's plain common sense, that most of them will have sex regardless, and it is better to be sure they know all the facts and options available to them instead of letting them go on misinformation, whispered rumors, and whatever they happen to find on the internet.