NAEA: Abstinence Education Works in Georgia

Teen Pregnancy Rate Slashed by nearly 50% since Georgia Mandated Abstinence Education

Washington, DC – Members of the National Abstinence Education Association congratulate Georgia educators and parents on the tremendous success of abstinence education in their state.  Georgia officials recently announced new figures showing that teen pregnancy rates have consistently and dramatically dropped for 11 straight years since the institution of abstinence education.  The pregnancy rate for ages 15-17 years has fallen from 68.3 (per 1000) in 1994 to 36.8 in 2005, a decrease of 46% over the past 11 years. 

     Teen intercourse rates are now lower (as a percentage of teen population) than they were in 1976.  Could a philosophy that states:  “you’re going to have sex anyway so here is how you use a condom.” (Comprehensive sex Ed) be responsible for a decline in teen sexual activity?

      This chart can be located from the following link.  Which is, by the way, from the CDC.  (Center for Disease Control) Additionally, all statistics and studies quoted on this site or from peer reviewed original sources.

apps.nccd.cdc.gov

United States Center for Disease Control National Youth Survey Data

Youth Online: Comprehensive Results

United States All Years
Percentage of students who ever had sexual intercourse

Variance: 95% Confidence Interval Standard Error None

UNITED STATES ALL YEARS
PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO EVER HAD SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR SURVEY

     Abstinence Education is obviously a logical, medically accurate response to the problem of teen pregnancy, STDs, and sexual behavior.  It is now validated by a decline in teen sexual behavior and several (over 12) peer reviewed studies (following)

Not Me, Not Now. Not me, Not Now is a community wide sexual abstinence intervention targeted to 9 to 14 year olds in Monroe County, New York, which includes the city of Rochester. The Not Me, Not Now program devised a mass communications strategy to promote the abstinence e message through paid TV and radio advertising, Billboards, posters, distributed in schools, educational materials for parents, an interactive Web site, and educational sessions in school and community settings. The program sought to communicate five themes: raising awareness of the problem of teen pregnancy, increasing an understanding of the negative consequences of teen pregnancy, developing resistance to peer pressure, promoting parent-child communication, and promoting abstinence e among teen.

    Not Me, Not Now was effective in reaching early teen listeners, with some 95 percent of the target audience within the county reporting that they had seen a Not Me, Not Now ad. During the intervention period, the program achieved a statistically significant positive shift in attitudes among pre-teens and early teens in the county. The sexual activity rate of 15-year-olds across the county (as reported in the Youth Risk Behavior Survey) dropped by a statistically significant amount from 46.6 percent to 31.6 percent during the intervention period. Finally, the pregnancy rate for girls aged 15 through 17 in Monroe County fell by a statistically significant amount, form 63.4 pregnancies per 1000 girls to 49.5 pregnancies per 1000. The teen pregnancy rate fell more rapidly in Monroe County than in comparison counties in upstate New York in general, and the difference in the rate of decrease was statistically significant.(1)

Operation Keepsake. Operation Keepsake is a sexual abstinence education program for 12- and 13-year old children in Cleveland, Ohio. Some 77 percent of the children in Cleveland, Ohio. Some 77 percent of the children in the program were black or Hispanic. An evaluation of the program in 2001, involving a sample of over 800 students, found that “Operation Keepsake had a clear and sustainable impact on…abstinence beliefs.” The evaluation showed that the program reduced the rate of onset of sexual activity (loss of virginity) by roughly two-thirds relative to comparable student in control school who did not participate in the program. In addition, the program reduced by about one-fifth the rate of current sexual activity among those with prior sexual experience. (2)

Abstinence by Choice. Abstinence by Choice operates in 20 schools in the Little Rock area of Arkansas. The program targets 7^th, 8^th, and 9^th grade students and reaches about 4000 youth each year. A recent evaluation, involving a sample of nearly 1000 student, shows that the program has been highly effective in changing the attitudes that are directly linked to early sexual activity rates of girls by approximately 40 percent (from 10.2 percent to 5.9 percent) and the rate for boys by approximately 30 percent (form 22 percent to 15.8 percent) when compared with similar students who had not been exposed to the program. (The sexual activity rate of students in the program was compared with the rate of sexual activity among control students I the same grade in the same schools prior to the commencement of the program.) (3)

Virginity Pledge Movement. A 2001 evaluation of the effectiveness of the virginity pledge movement using the data from the national Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health finds that virginity pledge programs are highly effective in helping adolescents delay sexual activity. According to the authors of the study:

     Adolescent who pledge, controlling for all of the usual characteristics of adolescents and their social context that are associated with the transition to sex, are much less likely that adolescents who do not pledge, to have intercourse. The delay effect is substantial and robust. Pledging delays intercourse for a long time.

     The study, based on a sample of more than 5000 students, concludes that taking a virginity pledge reduces by one-third the probability that an adolescent will begin sexual activity compared with other adolescents of the same gender and age, after controlling for a host of other factors linked to sexual actively rates such as physical maturity, parental disapproval of sexual activity, school achievement, and race. When taking a virginity pledge is combined with strong parental disapproval o0f sexual activity, the probability of initiation of sexual activity is reduced by 75 percent or more. (4)

Teen Aid and Sex Respect. An evaluation of Teen Aid and Sex Respect abstinence education program in three school districts in Utah showed that both programs in three school districts in Utah showed that both programs were effective among the students who were at the greatest risk of initiating sexual activity. Approximately 7000 high school and middle school students participated in the evaluation. To determine the effects of the programs, students in schools with the abstinence programs were compared with students in similar control schools within the same school district. Statistical adjustments were applied to further control for any initial differences between program participants and control students. The programs together were shown to reduce the rate of initiation of sexual activity among at-risk high school students by over a third when compared with a control group of similar students who were not exposed to the program. Statistically significant changes in behavior were not found among junior high students.

    When high school and junior high school students were examined together, Sex Respect was shown to reduce the rate of initiation of sexual activity among at risk students by 25 percent when compared with a control group of similar students who were not exposed to the program. Teen Aid was found to reduce initiation of sex activity by some 17 percent. A third non-abstinence program, Values and Choices, which offered non-directive or value-free instruction in sex education and decision-making, was found to have no impact on sexual behavior.(5)

Family Accountability Communicating Teen Sexuality (FACTS). An evaluation performed for the national Title XX abstinence program examined the effectiveness of the Family Accountability Communicating Teen Sexuality abstinence program in reducing teen sexual activity. The evaluation assessed the FACTS program by comparing a sample of students who participated in the program with a group of comparable student in separate control schools who did not participate in the program. The experimental and control students together comprised a sample of 308 students. The evaluation found the FACTS program to be highly effective in delaying the onset of sexual activity. Students who participated in the program were 30 percent to 50 percent less likely to commence sexual activity than were those who did not participate. (6)

Postponing Sexual Involvement (PSI). Postponing Sexual Involvement was an abstinence education program developed by Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, and provided to low-income 8^th grade students. A study published in Family Planning Perspectives, based on a sample of 536 low-income students, showed that the PSI program was effective in altering sexual behavior.  A comparison of the abstinence program participants with a control population of comparable low-income minority students who did not participate showed that PSI reduced the rate of initiation of sexual activity during 8^th grade by 60 percent for boys and over 95 percent for girls. As the study explained:

 The program had a pronounced effect on the behavior of both boys and girls who had not been sexually involved before the program…By the end of eighth grade, boys who had not had the program were more than three times as likely to have begun having sex as were boys who had the program…Girls who had not had the program were as much as 15 times more likely to have begun having sex as were girls who had had the program.

      The effects of the program lasted into the next school year even though no additional sessions ere provided. By the end of the 9^th grade, boys and girls who had participated in PSI were still some 35 percent less likely to have commenced sexual activity than were those who had not participated in the abstinence program.(7)

Project Taking Charge. Project Taking Charge is a six-week abstinence education curriculum delivered in home economics classes during the school year. It was designed for use in low-income communities with high rates of teen pregnancy. The curriculum contains these elements: self-development; basic information about sexual biology (anatomy, physiology, and pregnancy); vocational goal-setting; family communication; and values instruction on the importance of delaying sexual activity until marriage. The effect of the program has been evaluated in two sites: Wilmington Delaware, and West Point Mississippi. The evaluation was based on a small sample of 91 adolescents. Control and experimental groups were created by randomly assigning classrooms to either receive or not receive the program. The students were assessed immediately before and after the program and through a sex-month follow-up.

      In the six-month follow-up, Project Taking Charge was shown to have had a statistically significant effect in increasing adolescent’s knowledge of the problems associated with teen pregnancy, the problems of sexually transmitted diseases, and reproductive biology. The program was also shown to reduce the rate of onset of sexual activity by 50 percent relative to the students in the control group, although the authors urge caution in the interpretation of these numbers due to the small size of the evaluation sample. (8)

Teen Aid Family Life Education Project. The Teen Aid Family Life Education Project is a widely used abstinence education program for high school and junior high students. An evaluation of the effectiveness of Teen Aid, involving a sample of over 1,300 students, was performed in 21 schools in California, Idaho, Oregon, Mississippi, Utah, and Washington. The Teen Aid program was shown to have a statistically significant effect in reducing the rate of initiation of sexual activity (loss of virginity) among high-risk high school students, compared with similar students in control schools. Among at-risk high school students who participated in the program, the rate of initiation of sexual activity was cut by more than one fourth, from 37 percent to 27 percent. A similar pattern of reduction was found among at-risk junior high students, but the effects did not achieve statistical significance. (9)

1. Andrew Doniger, “Impact Evaluation of the ‘Not Me, Not Now’ Abstinence Oriented, Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Communications Program, Monroe County, New York, “Journal of Health Communications, vol. 6 (2001), pp. 45-60. Both shifts in attitudes and the decline in sexual activity rate over the intervention period were statistically significant at the 95 percent confidence level. The difference in the rate of decline in adolescent pregnancy in Monroe County, when compared to other geographic areas, was statistically significant at the 95 percent levels.
2. Elaine Borawski et al., Evaluation of the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs Funded through the Wellness Block Grant (1999-2000), Center for Health Promotion Research, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Case Western Reserve University, School of Medicine, March 23, 2001. The program effects on sexual activity were significant at the 93 percent level.
3. Stan E Weed, Title V Abstinence Education Programs: Phase I Interim Evaluation Report to Arkansas Department of Health, Institute for Research and Evaluation, October 15, 2001. The effects of the program in reducing the onset of sexual activity were statistically significant at the 98 percent confidence level.
4. Peter S Bearman and Hanna Bruckner, “Promising the Future: Virginity Pledges and First Intercourse,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 106, No. 4 (January 2001), pp. 861,862. Te effects of a virginity pledge were shown to be statistically significant at the 95 percent confidence level.
5. Stan E Weed, Predicting and Changing Teen Sexual Activity Rates: A comparison of Three Title XX Programs, report submitted to the office of Adolescent Pregnancy Programs, US Department of Health and Human Services, December 1992. The effects the programs had on at-risk high school students were significant at the 99 percent confidence level.
6. Stan E Weed, FACTS Project: Year End Evaluation Report, 1993-1994, prepared for the Office of Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Programs
7. Marion Howard and Judith Blarney McCabe, “Helping Teenagers Postpone Sexual Involvement,” Family Planning Perspectives, January/February pp21-26. These effects were statistically significant at the 99 percent level.
8. Stephen R. Jorgensen, Vicki Potts, and Brian Camp, “Project Taking Charge: Six-Month follow-Up of a Pregnancy Prevention Program for Early Adolescents,” Family Relations, pp401-406. The effects of the program in reducing the rate of onset of sexual activity were statistically significant at the 94.9 percent confidence level. The effects of the program on specific areas of knowledge were significant at the 95 percent confidence level and above.
9. Stan E Weed, Jerry Prigmore, and Raja Tanes, The Teen Aid Family Life Education Project; Fifth Year Evaluation Report, Institute for Research and Evaluation. The effect of the program on the sexual activity of high-risk high school students was statistically significant at the 99 percent level.

 This is the tip of the iceberg. The evidence that abstinence education works is overwhelming. However, the credible studies that support abstinence education do not seem to interest the main stream media. What will we cover next? We will take a look at three recent studies that sought to discredit abstinence education. These three studies received extensive media coverage and their content was even used (to take a jab at abstinence education) by late night comedians. We will look at the science (or lack of it) behind the studies as well as the media response to the studies. I don’t know when I’ll have time to get this up. Come back soon. Many of you probably have in mind the “studies” I will address. Keep your eye on the site. The title of that page will be, “Bad Science”.

Won’t Condoms Keep Teens Safe?

    Abstinence education is a logical approach to the problem of teen pregnancy and STDs.  This is becoming even more apparent as condom ineffectiveness against viral disease is becoming a scientific fact.  Though condoms have been shown to decrease the transmission of aids, the same cannot be said for herpes and HPV.  Once again, this is logical.  Herpes and HPV are skin-based diseases.  They do not need the exchange of body fluid to occur in order to be contracted.  The viruses can be present throughout the whole genital region.  This is simply a scientific fact.  The condom only covers a portion of the genital region of one partner.  It is logical to assume that parts of the genital region will come into contact that are not covered by a condom.  Therefore it is safe to conclude that condoms do not offer protection against the transmission of Herpes and HPV. Let’s follow this logical statement in simpler fashion:  The viruses that cause herpes and HPV can be present throughout the whole genital region, condoms do not cover the whole genital reason, therefore condoms do not protect against Herpes or HPV.  Logic.

Peer Reviewed Studies that support Abstinence Educations position on condom ineffectiveness

   Following are just a few of the studies that show how ineffective condoms are against herpes and HPV.  These studies are from credible national organizations and are not funded or connected to the abstinence movement in any way.  The mainstream media have chosen not to cover these very important findings.  Why, whenever I conduct an interview I include this information and often hand over copies of the CDC and NIH study to the interviewer.  Most often they edit the below facts from the interview that airs or goes to print.  Why?  Think about it.

What Is Cumulative Effectiveness?

 Cumulative effectiveness refers to the likelihood of becoming infected with an STD over time.  It looks at the relationship between risk and the time exposed to that risk.  In the case of condoms and cumulative effectiveness the question would then be to what extent are condoms effective at reducing cumulative risk (preventing disease transmission over a period of time)?  Most of the studies I refer to in my show and that follow regard cumulative risk.  All these studies show double digit disease acquisition rates.  Or stated differently, high failure rates.

 What is interesting to note, is that condom manufactures and comprehensive sex advocates never quote failure rates in relation to cumulative risk reduction.  For example they may quote something like a two percent slippage and breakage rate.  That’s great, but then one reads the details of the study and discovers this refers to one sexual act one time.  Does anyone see a problem with this?  All the studies that quote single digit failure rates do not take into account cumulative risk.  So is the condom/comprehensive sex crowd lying?  They are not lying, they just aren’t sharing the fact you can only have one sex act one time wearing the condom properly in order to benefit from the very low failure rate they promote.

 The “1.5 failure rate” myth is very powerful.  Let us break down the effect of cumulative risk for one (the paragraphs are me, I couldn’t help myself) study:  The risk of females acquiring gonorrhea from infected males is believed to be 50 percent from one act of sex without using a condom.  For their study the authors used a 3 percent (what the condom advocates promote and testify to frequently) slippage and breakage rate.  Allowing for only 3 percent failure rate 1.5 percent of women would be expected to acquire gonorrhea after on act of sex with an infected partner. (Great, let's have a party, run an add, do some cool promotions during spring break and help keep kids “safe”. But wait.)  After 10 acts of sex one would expect 14 percent of women to become infected and after 30 acts of sex with an infected partner, the expected risk would escalate to 37 percent even with perfect condom use.  (Is it any wonder that 20% of Americans over 12 have an incurable virus?)

Mann JR, Stine CC, Vessey J.  The role of disease-specific infectivity and number of exposures on the long-term effectiveness of the latex condom. Sex Transm Dis. 2002;29:344-349

 
We needed to take some time to understand the role of cumulative effectiveness before moving on.  If you don’t understand the roll of risk reduction over time then you will simply dismiss the following studies as exaggerated.  Most of America has been indoctrinated into the “1.5-3%” failure rate manipulation.  I can’t call it a lie.  You can enjoy the single digit failure rates promoted by the condom companies and the comprehensive sex ed crowd.  Just have one sex act one time.

 For those of you that may be interested in how condoms performed in the real world, with real people, let's look at some more peer reviewed studies.  The study findings are in regular font and the sources are in italics:

 If you always use condoms for vaginal sex, you will only reduce your chance of getting herpes by about half.  To date, there is no evidence that condoms reduce your chance of getting herpes during oral or anal sex.

 Shlay, JC, McClung MW, Patnaik JL, Douglas JM Jr. Comparison of sexually transmitted disease prevalence by reported level of condom use among patients attending and urban sexually transmitted disease clinic. Sex Transm Dis. 2004; 31(3):154-160

 Wald A. Langenberg AG, Krantz E, et al.  The relationship between condom use and herpes simplex virus acquisition:  Ann Intern Med.  2005;143(10):707-713

 Women whose partners used condoms all the time were 70% less likely to acquire a new HPV infection during an eight month period.  (From Keith; this is worded favorably, think about it.  It means only a 70% risk reduction.  And the difference between 70% and 100% is…What if this study had been carried out to a full year?)

 
New England Journal of Medicine, June 22, 2006 Vol. 354:2645-2654

 Follow the below link to the actual study.

 http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/354/25/2645

 While latex condoms do reduce the transmission of HIV/AIDs, there is not enough evidence to determine that they were effective in reducing the risk of most other sexually transmitted diseases.

National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious diseases, National Institutes of health, Department of Health and Human Services.  Workshop Summary:  Scientific Evidence On Condom Effectiveness for Transmitted Disease Prevention, July 20, 2001

Condoms have no impact on the risk of sexual transmission of Human papilloma virus in women and there is no clear evidence that condoms reduce HPV transmission in men.

“Federal Panel on condoms Offers Crucial Warnings to sexually Active Americans, Says The Medical Institute for Sexual Health.” NIH condom report, July 19^th, 2001

Only the women’s risk of getting herpes is slightly reduced.  Using condoms didn’t help men reduce their risk of getting the disease at all.

Wald, A.G.M. Langenberg, K. Link, et al., “Effect of condoms on Reducing the Transmission of Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2 from Men to Women.” Journal of the American Medical Association 285 (2001): 3100-3106

A review of scientific research shows that condom use offers relatively little protection (from “zero” to “some”) for herpes and no protection from HPV.  On average, condoms failed to prevent the transmission of the HIV virus between 15 percent and 31 percent of the time.  While condom use has increased over the past 25 years, the spread of STDs has likewise continued to rise.

Dr. Susan Weller, “Meta-Analysis of Condom Effectiveness in Reducing Sexually Transmitted HIV” Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 36 12 (1993). See also National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, “Summary,”  Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention, July 20,  2001

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/dmid/stds/condomreport.pdf

Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, Tracking the Hidden Epidemics 2000: Trends in STDs in the United States, 2000, at

http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/news/RevBrochure1pdftoc.htm

Yes, some of the above studies are contradictory, but they all show long term disease  acquisition rates in double digits.   

   Given the above scientifically supported information, it would be logical to promote abstinence as the only successful way to avoid sexually transmitted disease as well as the only way to avoid viral (skin based) disease.  Abstinence is not an ideological response to a problem, it is a logical response.