By Rob Stein
The Washington Post
WASHINGTON -- Sex education programs that encourage teenagers to delay sexual activity but also teach them how to reduce their chances of getting pregnant or a sexually transmitted disease cut risky sexual behavior, increase condom use and lower the chances of getting the AIDS virus and other infections, an independent expert panel concluded in a report released Friday.
But there is insufficient evidence to know whether programs that focus on encouraging teens to remain sexually abstinent until marriage reduce the chances adolescents will engage in sexual behavior, be less likely to become pregnant or less likely to get a sexually transmitted disease, the panel concluded.
"There is sufficient evidence that comprehensive risk reduction efforts are effective," said Randy Elder, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), who works with the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, an independent 15-member panel that issues public health recommendations.
"As regards abstinence education, after a similar look the task force determined that based on a number of problems with the studies presented to them there was insufficient evidence" to determine their effectiveness," Elder said.
The conclusions came after the task force reviewed an analysis of 83 studies of sexual education programs run between 1980 and 2007. The analysis was conducted by a 19-member team of experts assembled by the CDC to examine the politically sensitive question.
The findings were immediately welcomed by advocates of programs that reduce teen pregnancy and critics of abstinence programs.
"Most Americans would like their teens to stay away from sex," said Sarah Brown, of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. "Strong research shows that the best way to do this, especially in schools, is to use a curriculum that encourages teens to delay sex and also -- this is the key -- talks to them about family planning and protection. This is actually what most adults think is the right message -- delay and protect -- kind of like trust but verify."
But the findings were condemned by advocates of abstinence programs. They argued that in fact the analysis showed that such programs are effective and comprehensive programs are not.
"If you compare the statistical significance of outcome measures related to sexual activity and sexual intiation the data is better for the abstinence education program than the comprehensive program," said Valerie Huber, of the National Abstinence Education Association.
Two members of the CDC team issued a dissenting report disputing the findings as well. They argued, among other things, that the analysis shows that comprehensive sexual education program in schools do not significantly increase teen condom use, reduce teen pregnancy or STDS.
"This is an important finding because the school classroom is where most teens receive sex education," said Irene Erickson, of the Salt Lake City-based Institute for Research and Evaluation, who issued the dissenting report with Danielle Ruedt, of the Georgia Governor's Office of Children and Families. "Furthermore, the data indicated that many types of (comprehensive) programs do not work, even in non-school settings, yet the recommendations do not identify what those are. Unfortunately, the report's conclusion that comprehensive sex education programs are broadly effective simply ignores these findings. This is misleading to policy-makers who are seeking evidence-based programs, especially for schools."
