<p><a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070803/hl_nm/abstinence_hiv_dc[/url]”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070803/hl_nm/abstinence_hiv_dc</a></p>
<p>“Compared with no program, safer sex programs, and various other control programs, the abstinence-only programs did not seem to reduce HIV risk. Specifically, abstinence-only programs did not influence the rate of unprotected vaginal sex, the number of sexual partners, condom use, or initiation of sexual activity.”</p>
<p>Probably the reason there’s been no real traction on teen pregnancy or the abortion rate since 2000, after the steep declines of the '90s. But government funding for abstinence only education has been a real boon to friends of the administration.</p>
<p>Neither does the non-abstinence only program. :)</p>
<p>You sure about that, HH?</p>
<p>I don’t have any statistics (Mini?), but I’d imagine that programs that teach abstinence along with condom use, responsible sexual decision making, STIs, reducing STI risk, communicating with your partner about sex, how to get STI testing done, and overall ways to make sex safer to reduce the risk of HIV transmission would, in fact, reduce the rates of HIV transmission. Comprehensive health education should also include discussion about needle transmission, including the fact that most states offer clean needles in drug stores without a perscription.</p>
<p>While talking about HIV and unwanted pregnancy, I’m in favor of almost any honest program that produces healthy, happy, safe teenagers.</p>
<p>When sex is shrouded in secrecy and mystery, kids actually get into more trouble, not less.</p>
<p>Allmusic: Well we don’t have to worry about that “secrecy and mystery” thing anymore now do we…that world no longer exists. I went to school this year with several girls my age (16) who were pregnant and it ain’t no secret or mystery as to how they got that way. Looking for love in all the wrong places for sure which is sad cause now their futures are all laid out for them and they don’t have a lot of input or a plan.</p>
<p>“Abstinence education” leaves sex in secrecy and mystery, which often leads to pregnancies, like those of the girls in your class. Very sad.</p>
<p>LOL Tarheel.</p>
<p>Bet those girls, their boyfriends, and the respective families weren’t LOLing tho.</p>
<p>Serious stuff happens when you pretend that teenagers aren’t thinking about having sex.</p>
<p>
Add their kids onto that list.</p>
<p>I think this was concluded by the Center For Disease Control in 2003, though it is important to remind us over and over. Also by the Surgeon General in 2001 and multiple studies since.</p>
<p>Corranged suggestions are excellent.</p>
<p>Why is Tarheels sad description funny?</p>
<p>Any kid with access to the internet (and /or a tv) and HALF a brain can figure out what sex is all about nowadays. </p>
<p>“Shrouded in mystery” ? Give me a break.</p>
<p>Hereshoping, this is what they figure from the Internet:</p>
<p>1.BDSM is normal</p>
<p>2.Lesbians are hot</p>
<p>3.Men are dominants and women submissives.
That isn’t sex education.</p>
<p>4.Oh yes, it is cool to shave down there.</p>
<p>Sure. They have no clue how a girl gets pregnant. That’s for sure. All that mystery…deep…dark…secrets…</p>
<p>No, but they’re discouraged from preparing themselves for sex, because they won’t be having any. All well and good–til they do and aren’t prepared for the responsibilities that go with it. </p>
<p>The teenage pregnancy rates and abortion rates fell dramatically during the 90s as condom use increased. The Bush adminstration took over and started telling kids that condoms weren’t relevent to their lives–and all the progress came to a halt.</p>
<p>It’s not limited to the US unfortunately. USAID under Randall Tobias tried to require developing countries that took money from the US to fight HIV to use only the administration’s favored approaches–even if they paid for the more successful programs only with other monies and not the US money. They couldn’t have the US money at all unless they agreed to stop doing things that worked and do only things that didn’t. </p>
<p>Not too surprising that a lot of countries said no thank you, especially Brazil. States are now beginning to do the same thing with the administration’s abstinence only federal dollars. They’d rather pay out of pocket for something that works than get federal money for something that doesn’t.</p>
<p>There is more to sex than how babies are made, HH. Sex can be mysterious even to people who know that egg + sperm could = baby.</p>
<p>I wasn’t trying to be funny. I have many friends who gave up their virginity at a young age and they now regret it…I’m speaking of girls here not the guys. I don’t refer to it as “losing ones virginity” because you can’t lose something you choose to give away and that’s what I tell them. I don’t understand why they think it is something they have to do or need to do. Just the way they talk about it afterwards tells me they are way too immature for that kind of intimacy and they are always so surprised when the guy dumps them and moves on to someone else. Not to mention how it binds you to that person in a way that is hard to get over when the relationship is over, and they always end at this age. It ain’t worth it…find something else to do with your time until you are older, more mature, and can provide for the consequences of sex which is often a baby.</p>
<p>If they watch FOX they won’t learn about condoms:</p>
<p>Re an ad for Trojan’s:
“FOX objected to the promotion of condoms to prevent pregnancy and the ad’s alleged lack of public health issues. In a statement, FOX said that “contraceptive advertising must stress health-related uses rather than the prevention of pregnancy,” even though “contraceptive” by definition means the “prevention of pregnancy”.”</p>
<p>Well, they won’t learn about it from listening to John McCain either. He pronounced himself “stumped” on the question of whether condoms could reduce the spread of AIDS.</p>
<p>If an incredibly wealthy and powerful US Senator doesn’t know this, it shows how urgent the need for fact-based sex education really is!</p>
<p>(Not to mention how alarming it is that someone that uninformed is shaping US policy affecting hundreds of millions of lives).</p>
<p>Some abstinence only programs are worse than ineffective–they actually provide misinformation about condom use in order to discourage their use!</p>
<p>The evidence regarding the effectiveness of “safer sex” (or “abstinence-plus”) programs is overwhelming. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, the American Academu of Gynecologists and Obstetricians, the American Medical Association, the National Medical Association, all examining the evidence, came to the same conclusion.</p>
<p>In our state, through a law enacted this year, school districts are required to deliver “evidence-based” sex education in the schools. “Evidence-based” means a program with results published in a peer-reviewed journal, which could be applied with fidelity to a similar population. The reason the law was written this way is because there are several hundred “safer sex” and “abstinence plus” programs, so that school districts would have a very wide variety of choices available to them. It also means an end to “abstinence only” programs - the Superintendent of Schools could not find a single program that met the “evidence-based” requirement. </p>
<p>The CDC itself used to list such programs themselves until the Bush Administration forced them to remove the list from the CDC website. (That’s old news - happened in 2002.)</p>