Studies Rebut Earlier Report on Pledges of Virginity

[rodeodance]

we knew this was coming.



http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/15/health/15pledge.html?th&emc=th

June 15, 2005

Studies Rebut Earlier Report on Pledges of Virginity

By LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN

Challenging earlier findings, two studies from the Heritage Foundation reported yesterday that young people who took virginity pledges had lower rates of acquiring sexually transmitted diseases and engaged in fewer risky sexual behaviors.

The new findings were based on the same national survey used by earlier studies and conducted by the Department of Health and Human Services. But the authors of the new study used different methods of statistical analysis from those in an earlier one that was widely publicized, making direct comparisons difficult.

Independent experts called the new findings provocative, but criticized the Heritage team's analysis as flawed and lacking the statistical evidence to back its conclusions. The new findings have not been submitted to a journal for publication, an author said. The independent experts who reviewed the study said the findings were unlikely to be published in their present form.

The authors of the new studies, Dr. Robert Rector, a senior research fellow in policy studies at the foundation, and Dr. Kirk A. Johnson, a senior policy analyst there, said their findings contradicted those published in March in The Journal of Adolescent Health by Dr. Peter Bearman, the chairman of the sociology department at Columbia University, and Hannah Brückner of Yale University. The earlier study found that a majority of teenagers who took the pledge did not live up to their promises and developed sexually transmitted diseases about the same rate as adolescents who had not made such pledges. It also found that the promise did tend to delay the start of intercourse by 18 months.

...........

[meganmonkey]

1. Dirty Pirate WHORES!!!

:rofl:

[Tempest]

2. The rightwing Heritage Foundation caught using fuzzy math

The team needs to do "a lot of work" on its paper, said David Landry, a senior research associate at the Alan Guttmacher Institute in New York. He said in an interview that it was "a glaring error" to use the result of a statistical test at a 0.10 level of significance when journals generally use a lower and more rigorous level of 0.05.

[rodeodance]

4. this is the Bushco use of science--change it for your purposes.

......The team needs to do "a lot of work" on its paper, said David Landry, a senior research associate at the Alan Guttmacher Institute in New York. He said in an interview that it was "a glaring error" to use the result of a statistical test at a 0.10 level of significance when journals generally use a lower and more rigorous level of 0.05.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

15. Why isn't the Heritage Foundation identified as conservative "think tank."

This newspeak machine is frequently quoted as a source and employees are given ample access to made televised comments but they are seldom noted as being conservatively biased. Doesn't anyone every complain about this dubious omission by various news organizations? The public needs to know from what postion information/propaganda is being presented. If an organization has a conservative agenda this needs to be appended to any information they disseminate. This is a fundamental requirement of any creditable attempt at objective reporting of information to an uninformed public.

[Tempest]

17. Damn that "Liberal" media

If the Heritage Foundation was a Liberal think tank, you can bet your ass it would be labeled as such in the article.

[Sandpiper]

34. There isn't much "thinking" going on at the Heritage Foundation

It's just a straight up propaganda mill founded and funded by the Coors family.

[central scrutinizer]

29. it's a "think tank" only in the sense of thinking about propaganda

It is a right wing public relations firm that calls itself a "think tank" to add a cachet to its reports. It gives its PR flacks fancy titles like "Senior Fellow" and pads their CV's by creating lots of phony citations.

[daleo]

36. Yes, .10 is not acceptable.

Lots of people are even wary of claiming that .05 is much more than tentative.

[Sin]

3. In other news

The United Fox foundation has released reports that Chickens are actually safer when under the watchfully eyes of a Fox.

[rodeodance]

6. te he -good one

[SoCalDem]

5. MY study (conducted over a lifetime) shows

1. teenagers LIE about their sexual conduct
2. parents sometimes live in 'dreamland' when it conmes to THEIR kids
3. people are having as much sex as they always have had
4. bogus studies can say whatever you want them to say

[Massacure]

7. I think I can explain this.

People who do not want to have sex will not have sex whether they take the virginity pledge or not.

People who do want to have sex will have sex whether they take the virginity pledge or not.

People who take the virginity pledge are more often people who do not want to have sex.

People who do not take the pledge want to have sex.

The pledge is just something to prove the devotion of those who have already made up their mind of remaining virgins until marriage. It is not something that influences the actual decision of a person. Nothing the government does is going to change that. You can only educate people with the raw facts and hope for the best.

[johnaries]

12. You forgot one - teenagers will take any pledge their parents pressure

them into taking just to get their parents to STFU!
They'll still do whatever they want to....

[Straight Shooter]

13. I will add another item to the list

Teenagers (anyone for that matter) may have the best intentions in the world to abstain sexually, and yet when in a situation which heats up the hormones ...

How many people pledge to stick to their diet and then break it? Same thing. Consequences not as complicated, perhaps, but basically the same thing where the body wants something that is extremely difficult to resist.

[Ready4Change]

8. My GOD!

Early reports said pledges had about the same rate of sexual activites, but this latest study says no, they've had LESS sex.

Behold! Clinical evidence of born again VIRGINS! It's True! It's True!

:rofl:

[Gormy Cuss]

9. Cooking data 101

1. Choose results you like, regardless of (statistical) confidence level.

2. Call other more rigorous analyses fradulent.

<<<In an unusual feature of a scientific report, the Heritage team said that Dr. Bearman's team "deliberately misled the press and the public" ...
"That is an offensive statement," Dr. Bearman said. >>>

[formerrepuke]

10. The Heritage Foundation's analysis "flawed"...etc. No big surprise

there. But what can you expect from the organization that effectively serves as the RW ministry of propaganda....?

[ovidsen]

11. Just another case of "facts" being fixed around a policy...

[DBoon]

14. I will believe this when it is published in a peer reviewed journal

releasing this stuff pre-publication and pre-review makes it propaganda

[JitterbugPerfume]

16. boy---I sure don't recall

telling the "adults" in charge when I had sex as a teen ager

as a matter of fact if they HAD asked I would have lied like a pro
What is the matter with these people?

[DBoon]

18. folks who do "real" social science research

would know about this sort of thing, and understand the extent people lie on surveys like this.

People producing propaganda don't care.

[patcox2]

28. Umm, no, people doing SS research do rely on polls like this.

The poll in question is one of the biggest and most important ongoing studies in social science research.

Your scepticism is completely unwarranted.

Do you understand that the earlier study, which found that virginity pledges do nothing to lower STD rates, was based on the same survey?

The issue is not the survey, the issue is the methodology used by the heritage foundation hacks in analyzing the data from the survey.

[DBoon]

32. no I wasn't talking about the polls

I was talking about the method conclusions were derived from the polls, and the fact that real research is vetted heavily before it is published.

[napi21]

23. I'l tell you what's the matter with these people!

About 20 years ago, one of our neighbor kids (age 15) stole our car. He was of course young and stupid, and drove the car to the bus stop to show off to his friends when they came home that day. The local cop was waiting and watching, and caught him red handed! His mother said..."My don would NEVER do something like this because I go to Church every day!"

Even though he was caught driving the car, and admitted taking it that morning, she was in denial!

That's what's wrong with these RWers. They so much want to believe that what they say is true, they completely deny any contradictory information!!!

[NashVegas]

19. "lacking the statistical evidence to back its conclusions"

I wonder if the MSM will give the Heritage a blank check, anyway?

[redqueen]

20. Well, it is the LIBERAL media, after all...

so you know they'll give this CONSERVATIVE think tank a pass.

[Fleshdancer]

21. Can I be called Dr. Gloria Smith? Robert Rector doesn't have a Phd either

and yet he's labeled as Dr. Robert Rector. Must be nice!

[sonicx]

22. "KKK study says slaves were treated well"

[Writer]

24. The Heritage Foundation: We Create Our Own Realities

Does social science research not support your God-blessed beliefs? The Heritage Foundation is there to make sure your esoteric fantasies become true.

Call 1-888-FOR-LIES to get a free brochure on how the Heritage Foundation can help YOU!

[rodeodance]

27. te-he

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. LOL: peer-reviewed published findings vs. hackwork from Heritage

Who ya gonna believe, the accumulated methods of the scientific community or a couple of partisan hacks with a dog in the fight?

Preposterous.

[TroglodyteScholar]

26. It's the Rethug way....

Don't like the patterns you're seeing in a data set? Alter your methodology. As long as you say "we changed our methods" instead of "we're fixing it to agree with our biases," it sounds professional and acceptable, right?

What a bunch of losers......

:eyes:

[RalphReedsWreckedEm]

30. News Flash - Report says "Round Earth" theory disproven

Scholars at the Evangelical Republican Institute have released a report disproving an earlier study suggesting that the Earth is round. The new report also conclusively destroys all that liberal nonsense about the Sun being the center of our solar system.

[TroglodyteScholar]

31. Oh yes, and a somewhat related thread............

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1856468">Prof. to Present Research at HIV Conference (Rounded Sex-Ed not confusing)

This is about a Prof. at the Mercer University School of Medicine (a Southern Baptist affiliated university) who decided truth was better than party dogma. The idea is that well-rounded sex-ed (as opposed to abstinance-only) isn't really confusing our nation's youth at all, despite the persistent claims of the religiously insane right wing. Good stuff!

[Sandpiper]

33. I didn't need to read any further than "Heritage Foundation"

Hertiage Foundation = Funded by the Coors family

[daleo]

35. They used different statistical techniques

Also knowns as manipulating your data until it yields up the answer you wanted all along.