Using science to improve the sexual health of America's youth.

T u w b w p h For decades, sexuality education policies and practices in the U.S. have been a mixture of science, morality, politics, and the personal opinions of key ecisionmakers. Far too often, science has fared dismally hen policy, practice, and curriculum decisions were ade in state legislatures and local school board meetngs. The new research focusing on the meta-analyses of roup-based comprehensive risk reduction (CRR) and bstinence education interventions is one additional tool n the toolkit of those who want to use science, not ideolgy, to address the sexual risk-taking of America’s youth. The impact of poor and limited policies regarding sex ducation and access to contraception has far-reaching mpact in American society. For example, the U.S. teen regnancy rate is more than six times that of the Netherands, four times that of Germany, and three times that of rance. Similar statistics are found when examining rates f HIV/AIDS diagnoses as well. Rates in the U.S. are six imes greater than in Germany, three times greater than n the Netherlands, and 1.5 times greater than in France. n addition, youth in U.S. are signifıcantly less likely to se contraception than European youth. Although it is not suggested that any one sex education policy or curriculum will result in a signifıcant decline in these statistics, having good evidence-based policies and practices is a positive fırst step in creating a climate where sexuality is discussed as a normal part of the human experience. In addition, using science helps address sexual risk-taking by teens as a public health issue and not a morality debate.