|
 |
That rate compared with 20 percent among both whites and Mexican-American teens, the study from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found. About half of the girls acknowledged ever having sex; among them, the rate was 40 percent. While some teens define sex as only intercourse, other types of intimate behavior including oral sex can spread some infections.
For many, the numbers likely seem “overwhelming because you’re talking about nearly half of the sexually experienced teens at any one time having evidence of an STD,” said Dr. Margaret Blythe, an adolescent medicine specialist at Indiana University School of Medicine and head of the American Academy of Pediatrics’ committee on adolescence. Dr. John Douglas, director of the CDC’s division of STD prevention, said the results are the first to examine the combined national prevalence of common sexually transmitted diseases among adolescent girls. He said the data, from 2003-04, likely reflect current rates of infection. The study by CDC researcher Dr. Sara Forhan is an analysis of nationally representative data on 838 girls who participated in a government health survey.
This seems like an extremely high number to me, I wonder what the numbers were like from the late 60’s compared to today. And, what about the “studs”?
#30 SJP, I’m only dangerous to those who have only faith, with no fallback foundation of reason. Most others find me rather harmless 😉
I find you “harmless”, then. We must discuss this idea of “reason” at a later time. If for no other “reason” than 4 $#17’$&621|/|$.
A few questions I would like the CDC to answer:
1. Define “Sexually Transmitted Disease”
2. Can you prove this ratio of diseased teens is higher than it was 10, 30, 50 or more years ago?
I think it’s possible the numbers are so high due to advances in disease detection, not because more
girls are carriers. And seriously, what about the guys??? Sounds to me like scare tactics to push more meds and vaccines on the populace.
#2 & #9 & 10
I think you are right, this seems too high to me also. I think (and certainly hope) that they need a larger sample.
I am very much in favor of the cervix cancer vaccine.
I’m sure that the media and pop culture does have some ill effect on children today. I also believe that there is a much more damaging lack of good parenting, and family.
Religious folks, put the Ten Commandments up on your wall at home. Don’t expect the schools to teach morals, do it yourself. Take them to worship with you. Act in your own life, as a moral person.
You liberals, grow a backbone. You are suppose to be teaching your children, not trying to become their best friend. Start young and slap them silly when they don’t mind. You’re the boss, they are the kid. Grow up and take some responsibility.
All parents, talk to your children about sex. Not once, but several times throughout their lives. The talk will be different at the different ages of their lives. Yes, it will make you feel uncomfortable, tough. It is too important of a subject to let them learn about it at school, or on the street. It is not up to schools, TV, or society at large, to raise your children, and teach them to be decent, and moral people. It is up to you.
Gary,
It’s nice to be agreed with!
Although a liberal, I am personally quite conservative.
Even so, I think prudishness has actually backfired on America in regard to popular media and sexual behavior.
By not allowing explicit sex talk on broadcast TV, the shows end up still being highly sexual (that’s what people want) but in a goofy vague way that paints a really naive picture of sex.
I was raised a fundamentalist Christian and it’s surprising things was how explicit they were about sex! No kid in my church could claim ignorance about the risk of STDs. Although I’ve rejected fundamentalist Christianity, it did steer me away STDs and similar lifestyle pitfalls.
Anyway, I think more sexually explicit popular media — if it was fair and accurate — could actually help kids better understand the risks of promiscuity.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to suggest that all people who became sexually active as an unmarried minor, were immoral or bad people. Nor does contracting a STD, make you bad or immoral. Unfortunately, kids have been sexually active, probably as long as there have been kids.
I just feel that the trouble with teens says more about parenting, or the lack of it, than what’s on TV.
“The study by CDC researcher Dr. Sara Forhan is an analysis of nationally representative data on 838 girls who participated in a government health survey. Teens were tested for four infections:”
This “sounds like” a survey taken of girls who present themselves at health clinics??? If so, the numbers are entirely reasonable and meaningless.
Bad sensationalist headline grabbing technique to increase funding.
Would be nice to know what the real numbers are?—or to have the study group expressly defined.
Prayer in schools… yeah the lack of it caused STDs.
Let’s see….
During the tenure of Teacher-led Prayer in School we had:
The Civil War
World War I
World War II
Slavery
Segregation
After its removal:
Any world wars???? Nope
Any civil wars???? Nope
Slavery???? Nope
Segregation???? Nope
Wow, how much better we lived when we had forced prayer in school.
Cursor_
Isn’t this just natural selection? If they get cervical cancer, they can’t have kids and their wild ways will die with them. Sounds good to me. I know lots of people who shouldn’t have kids.
#38, Cursor,
Love it !!!
This is why I avoid sex with girls at all cost.
I’d like more info on how these 838 girls are a true representation on the actual populace of that age group in America. How can they prove its not just one in four in the particular sampling?
I would imagine that 800 gals from Watts would have a higher percentage of STDs than 800 gals from New Hampshire. But neither is a real representation of all of America.
This is possible. There have been other studies, where girls at a college were tested and half were found to have HPV.
JimS, your points about parenting are good, but nevertheless social science has shown that friends and society have a greater influence than parents.
1 in 4 among girls…
Interesting. Teen girls are doing well against the general population. HPV is carried by over 40% of the general population. HSV1 is carried by 1 in 4 in the total population as well, and that only accounts for those who are diagnosed. In reality, HSV1 may infect as much as 40 to 50% of the total population. These are the two most commonly carried viruses.
Unlike the modern mythology, HSV1 does not require sexual interaction to transfer and is often transfered to early age children, nonsexually, through family members.
It is estimated (with no real conclusive evidence, mind you) that HSV1 has a 400 to 1 probability of transmission. It doesn’t exactly spread like wildfire. Contracting HSV1 has no significant impact on overall health or quality of life, and often remains asymptomatic for many years at a time. In less than 1% of those affected, there may be a greater risk associated with a rare condition called intracerebral haemorrhage, which can be fatal.
While it is the cause of genital warts, HPV is generally only a chronic annoyance, except when it leads to cervical cancer… and because that likelihood is somewhat high, vaccination is an essential step that needs to be taken once we can get past the religious right’s ignorant and moralistic objections.
MikeN is (this is bizarre) absolutely right that condoms are of little defense against HPV because HPV transfers through skin and requires no fluid exchange. While HPV is less understood than other viruses, in terms of how it transfers and there may be considerable non-sexual transmission.
You can make judgments about behavior if it pleases you to do so, but the facts of sexual behavior and sexually transmitted diseases are going to be what they are and to ignore them is to stick your head in the sand.
You guys questioning the numbers act like the world would be rosey if it turned out that the real number was only 1 in 5 or 1 in 6. Whether the problem is more or less pervasive than the numbers on the table indicate, there is a serious issue and quibbling over the details creates a grand waste of time the blocks pragmatic solutions.
I guarantee this… If HPV only affected 1 in 50, but was proven affect only males and resulted in melting the cock clean off, not only would there be a vaccine that was made mandatory, but a massive chunk of our GNP would be dedicated to the eradication of that horrible scourge.
So in case you guys who keep a sharp eye out for feminist slants are wondering… Yes, a patriarchal and misogynistic political system slows the advance of proper preventative health policies because of the false perception that the most impacted victims of the most common STDs are… girls.
#44 .. Please don’t say genital warts. Oh, that is so nasty.
#45 – Sorry 🙁
I hope that little 18 year old slut I banged last night was clean. My wife will kill me if she gets the clap again.
With this current administration, part of me wonders if these stats have been “cooked” to please the religious right…
#48 – No… They haven’t.
The thing about humans is that they are naturally very very very bad at certain things (at least, without training). One of those things are probability and statistics (or is that two things?), and another is risk assessment, and yet another is disaster response.
So, we never believe the extent of a problem, we don’t know what to do about it, and when we do respond, we respond in wholly inappropriate ways.
No… The numbers aren’t cooked.
Yes… Your daughter has a 1 in 4 chance of having HPV, unless she’s over 18… in which case its closer to 1 in 3.
#49;
No, my daughter doesn’t have a 1/4 or 1/3 chance because I don’t have a daughter.
We have witnessed Bush’s cronies skew stats in so many other areas, forgive me if I wait until more independent review of this subject. I don’t have the time to run down to my college research library right now.
And I’m quite good at PRA, thank you very much.
#50 – HYPOTHETICALLY speaking your daughter does.
These are CDC numbers and these numbers have been consistent with many similar studies going back many years.
I know Bush is evil… But do you really think his diabolical plans for world domination include skewing STD stats at the CDC?
If you are good at PRA then you know I’m right about humans being naturally bad at it.
you boys just clicked because the pictire