NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - People who start having sex at a younger or older than average age appear to be at greater risk of developing sexual health problems later in life, a new study suggests.

ADVERTISEMENT




The findings, according to researchers, cast some doubts on the benefits of abstinence-only sexual education that has been introduced in U.S. public schools.

Using data from a 1996 cross-sectional survey of more than 8,000 U.S. adults, the researchers found that those who started having sex at a relatively young age were more likely to have certain risk factors for sexually transmitted diseases (STD) -- including a high number of sexual partners and a history of having sex under the influence of alcohol.

On the other hand, both "early" and "late" starters were at increased risk of problems in sexual function. This was true primarily of men, whose problems included difficulty maintaining an erection and reaching orgasm.

The findings are published in the American Journal of Public Health.

It's not clear from the survey why both early and late starters tend to have more sexual dysfunction, according to the researchers, led by Dr. Theo G.M. Sandfort of Columbia University in New York City.

But the findings, they write, "only partially support" abstinence-only sex education -- which encourages teenagers to save sex for marriage.

"Although our findings support an association between early initiation and long-term (STD) risk, they also suggest a more complicated picture of sexual functioning," Sandfort and his colleagues write.

Delaying sexual activity may "create health risks by impeding development of the emotional, cognitive, and interpersonal skills that are crucial to satisfactory sexual functioning and general well-being," they add.
On average, respondents said they had sex for the first time around the ages of 17 or 18. Those who had their first sexual encounter at average age of 14 were considered "early starters" and those who started at age 22 or older were considered "later starters."

It's not possible to determine cause-and-effect from the survey data, according to the researchers. For example, young men with sexual problems may start having intercourse at a later age, contributing to the link between later sexual "debut" and higher odds of sexual dysfunction.

However, Sandfort's team adds, the findings lend credence to other studies suggesting that abstinence-only education may actually increase the risk of certain health problems.

"Sexual education that is more supportive and acknowledges the diverse needs of young people might prevent the negative outcomes observed here," the researchers write.

SOURCE: American Journal of Public Health, January 2008.



*My bolds, lol. I think that's particularly true, right now I feel no well being in life, I mean I feel physically good but emotionally I'm a mess and I think it has to do with the fact that I've never had a relationship in my life, among other factors.

I don't know if this is a dumb question but what is the difference between masturbation and intercourse?? besides obviously the company of another person. I mean at the end you reach orgasm with both, so what is the difference??

I mean if a person starts masturbating at 13 but doesn't have sex witn another person until he or she is like 19, does that mean he/she is an early starter or average?

They write so much yet so little is said.

I think the people who did this study really need to consider the Bradford Hill Criteria for an epidemiological association, ie.
1.Strength of association
2.Consistency
3.Specificity
4.Temporality
5. Dose-response
6. Plausiblity
7.Coherence
8. Experiment
9. Analogy

In particular, in relation to the "late starters", temporality is a consideration (the factor must precede the outcome it is supposed to have affected). It seems more likely that they didn't have sex til late BECAUSE they had difficulty maintaining an erection, rather than "late starting" caused them to develop erection problems.

I didn't get any of that.

what health risks? i couldn't tell if they were implying whether you get the clap or become a serial killer.

Quick Ruth, fuck someone before you're too old!

__________________

ok how stupid is this...
the average is base on basically the younger and the older..it's just a social average not some kind of biological clock average...

maybe i want health risks

Basically cause and effect. Insomnia's suggesting that the age people loses their virginity is affected by their health problems, rather than causing them.

I can imagine that either losing it very early or not losing it (but not out of choice) could cause psychological discomfort, worry, and thus indirectly illness, if the culture a person came from was particularly scornful of those who lose it very early or very late. But I don't get how losing it or not could physically cause illnesses (apart from herpes, obv.). It's kinda like how people who are anti-gay sometimes cite non-heriditary mental illness in gay people, but not actually bothering to look any further at why gay people might be depressed because the evidence seems to prove their point.


I don't have to care because I'm pretty much Mr Average.

"Losing virginity early or late tied to health risks"

Sure, regarding those matters moderation has always been the rule.

Moderation is for wimpz.

I see. I think there is something true in teh article because I'm heavely scorned and look down upon for being gay alone and 24.

Like once this guy I told him I hadn't gone out with anyone for like 2 years and he deleted me from his list on the spot.

By the way, I've never said what you have on your signature.

Basically it the scale states that without the criteria above being met, losing your virginity early or late can't be proven to be linked to any adverse health outcomes. It basically works against bad science. Say I asked to be taken to the morgue of a hospital to do a check on the risk factors for car crash victims. I looked at the medical history of three of them. All of them were smokers. Doesn't this mean smokers are more likely to be killed in car accidents? No, the fault here would be my sample size was too small (8. experiment) and that the idea that you would be more likely to be run over by a car if you were a smoker is not biologically plausible ( 6. plausibility). It also doesn't display a dose-response (point number 5), relationship, where people who smoke say 60 a day are more likely to be run over than people who smoke 10 a day.

In this case, the main concern is that the plausibility of it. If you start having sex at 13, at 33 you will have had 20 years of having sex with people, so you are more likely to have come into contact with say, the herpes virus, than someone who started having sex at 32. This is plausible. However to state that sexual dysfunction is a consequence of putting an arbitrary age group figure is poor science. They may have done further investigations, but without it doesn't make particular sense. It seems likely to me to be the case that people starting early may have been pressurised into sex by their partner, and felt they weren't ready (or may have been abused). They maybe more likely to report sexual dysfunction as a consequence, but this would probably be the case with someone who at any age had felt that first sex was forced. Late starters may have had a medical problem that impeded starting early, or may have insecurities stemming from their feelings of inexperience as compared to their peers. But the age itself isn't a risk factor, its the psyche of the people involved.

Exactly. And the media will always entertain this kind of thing, regardless.

HCH, regarding your emphasis... it's not your delayed sexual activity that's causing you unhappiness. You've been pretty effective at identifying what bothers you in life (we've seen you do this enough times on here) and you're clearly emotionally lonely, dissatisfied with your work/unemployment, and frustrated by your lack of money. There's no magical elusive cause for all of that, just like there's no magical cure. It is what it is. You know how you got there. You've got to make changes in your life, strive for what you want, instead of feeling sorry for yourself and blaming everything else in the world.

I swear to god that's the last pep talk you're getting out of me!

__________________
Deux hommes font une promenade amicale. L'un des deux porte un parapluie à son bras.
Il se met à pleuvoir. L'homme n'ouvre pas son parapluie et l'autre lui demande pourquoi.
- Parce que ça ne servirait à rien, lui répond son ami. Il est plein de trous.
- Alors, pourquoi l'as-tu pris?
- Parce que je ne pensais pas qu'il pleuvrait.

Coincidence, dude. You have a horrible attitude and are very depressing to talk to. The fact that you're single may be connected to that, but I wouldn't be surprised if he just couldn't stand you.

No shit.

if you're late it's probably because you're repulsive and that's going to make you unhappy. or maybe you're a christian which is also unfortunate

if you're early it's because you're a slut, which should be a recipe for happiness, but then you get old and no one likes an old slapper

__________________
they made soup out of my research turtles.

Depression is bad for your health AND your sexy prospects.

so correlation through common cause, rather than any cause and effect.

__________________
they made soup out of my research turtles.

It's a definite possibility.