(CNSNews.com) – The “abstinence-only” message to reduce teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases actually works. That is the conclusion of a scientific study that was released Monday by the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.
 
The study found that an abstinence-only message was significantly more successful in getting pre-teens to delay the onset of sexual activity than was a “health-promotion control intervention” – or general risk-reduction effort.
 
“It shows that the kind of abstinence-only intervention that we used was effective in reducing rates of sexual initiation among young African American adolescents, compared with a health-promotion control group,” lead author John B. Jemmott III, a professor at the UPenn School of Medicine, told CNSNews.com.
 
Researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial in which a total of 662 African American students in grades 6 and 7 took part in Saturday “interventions” – activities and programs held in classrooms at four public schools participating in the study.
 
The students were randomly assigned to an eight-hour abstinence-only “intervention” promoting the abstinence message; an eight-hour “safer sex-only” intervention; an eight- or 12-hour combined abstinence and safer-sex intervention, or an eight-hour health-promotion control group.
 
There was a 33 percent reduction in self-reported sexual intercourse from the abstinence-only group, compared to the control group, by the end of the study. Of the students who reported that they were sexually active during the study, there were fewer reports of recent sexual activity from the abstinence-only intervention participants (20.6 percent) compared to the control participants (29.0 percent).
 
Participants in the abstinence-only intervention had reduced reports of multiple sexual partners compared with the control group (8.8 percent vs. 14.1 percent).
 
After two years, one-third of the abstinence-only group reported having sex, compared to one-half of the control group.
 
While abstinence-only intervention did not eliminate sexual activity all together, this is the first randomized controlled study to demonstrate that an abstinence-only intervention had reduced the percentage of adolescents who reported any sexual intercourse for a long period, in this case two years, following the intervention.
 
Leslee Unruh of the Abstinence Clearinghouse sees the study as vindication of the abstinence-only message -- one which has been under fire since the Clinton administration, when Congress passed a law providing funding for abstinence education.
 
“It’s what we’ve known all along,” Unruh told CNSnews.com. “We have been tracking the numbers all along, and until this particular study came out, we have really been ignored.
 
“We feel that this study is one of the best ones that have been done because it is one of the first evaluations and design that have employed a ‘full random assignment -- a design that would be fair to abstinence-until-marriage education programs,” Unruh said.
 
“It cannot be dismissed like other evaluations that have been done,” she added.
 
Researchers ask: is a successful abstinence-only program ‘even possible?’
 
Jemmott told CNSNews.com that the researchers didn’t undertake the study to vindicate abstinence-only education, but to find out if it was even possible for an abstinence-until-marriage program to be successful.
 
“Objectively speaking, there (are) basically two strategies that you could use to reduce the risk of exposure to sexually transmitted disease and risk of pregnancy – one is to reduce the frequency of sex, and the other is to increase the frequency of condom use or contraception,” Jemmott said.
 
“But it just turns out that most of the recent evidence has used an approach that emphasized condom use and included abstinence -- or in general, used both of those strategies combined. There have been many, many studies showing that this comprehensive approach is efficacious, but very little evidence on the side of abstinence-only,” Jemmott said.
 
“We started thinking – ‘Is it even possible to develop an abstinence-only intervention that could be effective?’ And we thought, ‘To do that, what you would have to do is take into effect the research that’s been done on comprehensive interventions – why did those interventions work and what are the qualities of successful interventions?’ And then apply those qualities in the development of an abstinence-only intervention. That’s what we tried to do,” Jemmott added.
 
What features worked? Jemmott said researchers found out what motivated pre-teens – and engaged them.
 
During the eight-hour abstinence-only session, “facilitators” used interactive small group activities to build the pre-teens’ knowledge of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases, bolster beliefs supporting practicing abstinence, and improve skills and confidence to help negotiate abstinence and resist pressure to have sex.
 
“You don’t lecture – you use activities that engage the adolescents – games, brainstorming, using videos, interactive activities,” Jemmott said. “You make it fun.”
 
Nearly a year ago, the Obama administration eliminated more than $150 million in federal funding for abstinence programs and launched a new $114 million “comprehensive” pregnancy prevention initiative. Obama pledged that the U.S. would only fund programs that have been demonstrated scientifically to be effective.
 
The president’s proposed budget, introduced Monday, would expand that program to $183 million next year.
 
Jemmott, meanwhile, said that his research doesn’t presume to speak for all abstinence-only approaches -- more research needs to be done before policy-makers weigh in on abstinence-only education.
 
“I think that a lot has been said against abstinence-only interventions categorically,” Jemmott told CNSNews.com. “I think this study says, ‘Wait a minute! It is possible for an abstinence-only intervention to be efficacious. And the study calls for more research.
 
“This is one study. What we really need is a larger body of evidence – several studies, rigorous studies -- evaluating whether an abstinence-only intervention can be efficacious. Once you have that body of evidence, then you can make strong public policy decisions,” Jemmott added.
 
The study was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health. It appears in the Feb.1 edition of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.