Agenda driven science reporting

Here is an Associated press headline "Study Finds 1 in 4 US Teens Has a STD"

And here is the opening paragraph of their report

At least one in four teenage American girls has a sexually transmitted disease, suggests a first-of-its-kind federal study that startled some adolescent-health experts.

Some doctors said the numbers might be a reflection of both abstinence-only sex education and teens' own sense of invulnerabilty. Because some sexually transmitted infections can cause infertility and cancer, U.S. health officials called for better screening, vaccination and prevention.

This story in various guises has been picked up by media outlets worldwide.

So I went to find the study and found the source of the story, it is a paper given at the 2008 STD Prevention conference conducted by the CDC.  The entire abstract of which is below the fold.

So who are the "some doctors" in the AP version of the story?

In truth this survey is very limited, the methodology used is not provided, although partially indicated, and probably adds little to what is known about teenage STD rates.

But what is known and conceded in the abstract below the fold is    abstinence is the surest way to prevent getting an STD.

Even though "some doctors" think promoting this is leading to an increase in STDs. And "health officials" think the solution lies in more screening and vaccinations.

Science is all about understanding uncertainties in the interpretation of data and making public policy on the basis of very uncertain data is all too common, I fear.

    Oral Abstract D4a – Prevalence of Sexually Transmitted Infections and Bacterial Vaginosis among Female Adolescents in the United States: Data from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2004

 

One in Four Female Adolescents Is Infected with At Least One Sexually Transmitted Infection, New CDC Study Finds

 

A new CDC study indicates that one in four (26%) female adolescents in the     United States has     at least one of the most common sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Led     by CDC’s Sara     Forhan, the study is the first to examine the combined national prevalence     of common STIs     among adolescent women in the United States.

 

    The authors analyzed data on 838 female adolescents (aged 14-19) who     participated in the     2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), a continuous     annual     study that examines a nationally representative sample of the U.S. household     population to     assess a broad range of health issues. For this analysis, the teens were     tested for human     papillomavirus (HPV) infection, chlamydia, herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2)     infection, and     trichomoniasis. The authors examined high-risk HPV types, including 23 types     of the virus that
    are known to cause cancer, and the two types that cause most genital warts.

 

    Based on the overall STI prevalence of 26 percent, the authors estimate     that about 3.2 million     adolescent females in the United States are infected with one of these STIs.     They note that the     total prevalence might be slightly higher than these estimates indicate,     because some STIs –     including syphilis, HIV and gonorrhea – were not included in the analysis;     however, the     prevalence of these STIs is low in this age group.

 

    In addition to overall STI prevalence, key findings of the new study include     the following:

• The most common STI was cancer- and genital wart-associated HPV (18.3%),     followed   by chlamydia (3.9%), trichomoniasis (2.5%), and HSV-2 (1.9%). Among the   teenage   girls who had an STI, 15 percent had more than one.
• By race, African American teenage girls had the highest prevalence, with     an overall STI     prevalence of 48 percent compared to 20 percent among both whites and     Mexican     Americans. (Other Hispanics and race/ethnic populations were captured     in the survey,     but there were insufficient numbers in any one group to permit valid     prevalence       estimates for any group except Mexican Americans.)
• Overall, approximately half of all the teens in the study reported ever     having had sex.       Among these girls, the STI prevalence was 40 percent.
• Even among girls reporting only one lifetime partner, one in five (20.4%)     had at least one     STI. Girls with three or more partners had a prevalence of over 50 percent.     The       predominant STI was HPV.

According to the authors, the high prevalence of HPV indicates that teenage   girls are at high   risk for this infection, even those with few lifetime sexual partners.   It is important to realize that   most HPV infections clear on their own; however some infections persist   over time, placing   women at risk for cervical cancer. A vaccine against HPV types 16 and 18,   responsible for 70   percent of cervical cancer, and types 6 and 11, responsible for nearly   all genital warts, is now     recommended routinely for 11 and 12 year-old girls.

These data also underscore the importance of chlamydia screening to ensure   prompt diagnosis   and treatment, and to avoid the serious long-term consequences of the disease,   which include   pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and infertility. CDC recommends annual   chlamydia screening     of all sexually active women aged 25 and under.

CDC supports a comprehensive approach to STD prevention that includes the   promotion of   abstinence as the surest way to prevent getting an STD, being in a mutually   monogamous   relationship with a partner known to be uninfected, and the consistent   and correct use of   condoms for sexually active people to reduce the risk of acquiring many   infections. Condoms   (used all the time and the right way) may lower your chances of passing   HPV to a partner or     developing HPV-related diseases.

Source:2008 National STD Prevention Conference

Comments

[ropata]

Perhaps it's time for the World Vision approach (ABC) which has been quite successful at reducing AIDS in Afica:

Abstinence (best option)
Be faithful (good option)
Condom (last resort)

[peter]

Ropata

In this thread you speak sense!!

[fugley]

Abstinence - we are "designed" to procreate, our urges only held in by social controls. And it doesn't work, the urge is too strong.

Be faithful - again, social conditioing. man is programmed to reproduce, in fact, that is the sole imperative of EVERY life form on the earth - to spread its genes.

Condom - Yep, a damned good idea! As is avoiding homosex.

Far better that we provide decent sex education while science works on a cure and a vaccine.

[dad4justice]

"Abstinence - we are "designed" to procreate, our urges only held in by social controls. And it doesn't work, the urge is too strong."

Is that stan or fugly saying that?

[ropata]

fugley: Reproduction is the "sole imperative of EVERY life form"?!

I'm hoping this comment is hyperbole. Yes it's a fundamental drive, but abstinence and faithfulness are certainly achievable. These approaches are only rubbished by ideologues who care more about their sexual agenda than the very real impact on human lives that can arise from a change in attitudes.

[ropata]

whoops, messed up the HTML!

[reid]

fugley: "in fact, that is the sole imperative of EVERY life form on the earth - to spread its genes...And it doesn't work, the urge is too strong."

fugley your ignorance is astounding. The difference between man and other animals perhaps excluding whales, is that we are sentient beings.

As such we are subject to a different framework of law and expected behaviour. I don't mean man-made law I mean natural law. The correct interpretation and application of natural law is peace, prosperity and happiness.

Rather different from the pointless and selfish behaviours we all daily witness, but that's because we don't apply it or understand it correctly.

Perhaps I've misunderstood, but your comment suggests that because you and some others have such weak control over your own instincts, and because you make no distinction between your own weakness and others who may possess more self-control, that you conclude therefore the right path is that the law should pander to you and your ilk.

I hope I have misunderstood and you can correct me, but if I haven't then your comment speaks volumes about you and the erroneous interpretations to which you subscribe.