Duval STD rate top in state (Blames Abstinence programs)

Although Florida's health clinics treat thousands of patients for sexually transmitted diseases each year, state statistics show that thousands more are never even tested.

A new study aims to track down the cause of this vexing trend by sending investigators into the affected communities.

"[Clinics] were noticing a decrease in the number of cases being diagnosed, so they were concerned about where those people are going and if they are being seen or not being seen," said UF associate professor of nursing Sharleen Simpson, who is conducting the study for the Florida Department of Health.

For the past year, Simpson and other researchers have been interviewing healthcare providers, community members, outreach groups and patients in Duval and Broward counties to find out what keeps those at risk from going to clinics for screenings and treatment.

"One of the things that's really come out is the great differences between counties in Florida," Simpson said.

The STD infection rate in Duval County, which includes Jacksonville, is well above the state average, while Broward's rate is typically at or below the average, according to the Department of Health's Bureau of STD Prevention and Control.

Last year for example, Duval's infection rate was more than twice the state average. The county also had more STD patients that year than Broward, despite the South Florida county's larger population.

Simpson, who will submit her first report to the state later this month, said she blamed Duval's abstinence-only sex education program for much of the difference.

Dan George, the health department's statewide STD field operations manager, also complained, saying the Duval policy was ineffective.

"Duval County typically has the highest rates for gonorrhea in the state of Florida and one of the highest rates in the country, which shows how well their abstinence-only system is working," he said.

Simpson added that, while most Duval students don't learn about safe sex or birth control, it was taught in the county's alternative education programs.

"The average teen-ager who doesn't get into trouble is at a disadvantage - you only get [sex education] after you've had problems."

But Simpson praised Broward's relatively effective network of outreach clinics and its sex education program, though she said recent state cutbacks were affecting the quality of service.

"They've had to really attack this a different way - they've been more pragmatic," she said.

However, she added that the overriding problem was still the unwillingness of those afflicted to go to an STD clinic.

"People don't want to go to an STD clinic because there's a lot of stigma attached to that," she said, noting that men were particularly affected.

While women can receive discrete screenings as part of gynecological or prenatal care, for men younger than 18, STD clinics are the only option that doesn't require parental consent.

"One of the things we've realized is you can't decrease the STD incidence in women without making sure men have adequate access as well," she said.

I'm the author of the above article (I found it while trying to find another article in our web archives). I'm curious as to why it was posted here, and what the significance of the bolded sections is. Are you alleging bias or stupidity on my part, or the part of the researcher? I noticed you put "Independent" in quotation marks. We are independent in that we are run by a private company and don't recieve any money from the university other than for advertising they buy. For that story I looked up the historical STD rates in Duval and Broward counties, and there was a definate trend of Duval's rates being about twice Broward's, even though Broward had almost a million more people. Being a part of the liberal-controlled commie media machine, I'm curious about the conservative explanation for why the whiter, richer, less urban, Republican-dominated county would have such drastically higher STD rates.

"I'm curious about the conservative explanation for why the whiter, richer, less urban,"

Very interesting comments. I know better than to believe this nonsense. I thought UF was supposed to have a good journalism college. I guess research isn't their forte! A quick search reveals the following:

Broward County 2000: 20% Black, 70.5% white

Duval County 2000: 27% Black, 65.8% white

Broward County 2000: under 18: 23.6% 18-24 years old: 7.2% Total under 25: 30.8%

Duval County: under 18: 26.3% 18-24 years old: 9.6% Total under 25: 35.9%

Broward County 1999 median household income $41,691 Duval County 1999 median household income $40,703

I won't comment on your article. I will inform, and let the others decide.

Anxiously waiting to read your response.

I noticed you put "Independent" in quotation marks. We are independent in that we are run by a private company and don't recieve any money from the university other than for advertising they buy.

You're right. This is the only way you can say you are independent. It certainly doesn't stand for independent thought.

Well it seems that the teen pregnancy rate is also twice as high in Duval compared to Broward, based on this map:

As for the highlighting, the poster probably felt that you had an agenda, and may have been overlooking other explanations for the higher rate of STDs especially since your article did not mention the STD rates in other counties.

So which county has the highest STD rate in Florida?

Do all of these red and brown counties have abstinence only sex-education?

Those counties are obviously dominated by war mongering, meat eating, homophobic, racist, SUV driving Christians.

This is a plot dating back from the days when the exclusively Democrat KKK ruled Florida.
No condoms, no peace!

Maybe this guy's writing an article about his FR experience. Maybe he'll actually reply to somthing before he fulfills his wish to get banned.
Sounds as if that's his main goal. Cheers.

I'm trying to be civil here, I was just wondering why my article was chosen as, apparently, some sort of example of media bias. It's a pretty straightforward science article, a UF researcher was doing a study and I reported what the study was about and what she said. Contrary to popular conservative belief, the article was not carefully vetted by the Communist and Democratic parties before publication. Likewise, contrary to popular liberal belief, I did not have to run it by our big corporate advertisers. Quite frankly as a science reporter I would just pick the most interesting-looking press releases, and much of what I wrote was governed by who I was able to get in contact with that day (obviously, not the Duval County health department -- probably the biggest flaw in that story). Science is for the most part not a hard-hitting or politcally charged beat.

God forbid you guys get your hands on anything I'm writing now as a member of the capitol press corps in Tallahassee. I covered a Democrat press conference the other day, I'm sure the fact that I chose to cover that and actually quote Democrats reveals me a secret spy for Sadaam Hussein, or whatever it is I am supposed to be.

Now if anyone has any serious allegations of bias or innacuracy in the article I'd love to hear them, perhaps from the original poster.

Touche, it appears my off the cuff remakrs were almost comprehensively wrong. Shows where stereotypes get you. However, I do generally take a bit more care in researching my articles. I can only assure you that very official-looking charts and graphs were involved in the writing of the above piece. Also, the original point of those comparisons was to imply that they were irrelevent. Unless the argument here is that being slightly poorer and slightly, er, blacker is enough to DOUBLE Duval's STD rates, in spite of a highly effective abstinence-based program?

If I recall the statistics correctly -- which, as you can see from the above post, I may not -- Duval was typically near the top, though not necessarily the highest. Sex education programs vary widely between counties, and demographic factors are obviously very important in influencing STD rates. I do remember that Alachua County's rates were significantly below Duval's, despite the presence of a large and promiscuous community of college students (many of whom are liberals, and thus more inclined to indulge in sinful behavior). These statistics should be available on the web site of the state department of health's STD division.
However, everyone should note that this was a news piece, the news being that a UF researcher was conducting a study on STDs. The news at issue was not Duval's STD rate, despite the misleading headline (written by copy editors, not me).

Well, at least you are man enough to admit when you are wrong. That at least says something about your character.

Let me put it to you like this: Duval County being slightly poorer and slightly "blacker" has more to do with their STD rates being higher than Broward County than abstinence education does. There really are a lot of factors involved in differences. First of all, I'd like to see the STD numbers and their source. "Double the rate" doesn't say very much to me. There may be an association between the abstinence education and STDs, however, I don't think their is causation.

BTW, how is Gville? God, I miss that place!

People post all kinds of things here. As noted in the amended title, abstinence was cited as a cause for increased rates of STDs. Abstinence is the only gauaranteed way to avoid STD, but who wants to do that these days?
I don't mean to imply that you are some sort of disruptor and the fact that you replied in a civil way shows some manners on your part.
I'm sure many here would love to hear some details of your press meeting with the FL dems. Reporting on them doesn't make you one, someone has to do it, eh?

Glancing back at the article, it's about STD rates, period.
I somehow thought it was rates for students. After checking the map again, Duval county is home to Jacksonville.
Can you say "crack"?

Being a part of the liberal-controlled commie media machine, I'm curious about the conservative explanation for why the whiter, richer, less urban, Republican-dominated county would have such drastically higher STD rates.

A tad defensive, aren't we? FWIW I don't think liberal bias is any kind of conspiracy, nor do most thoughtful conservatives. It's just that most reporters (2/3rds to 90%, depending on the source) self-identify as liberal or democratic voters. I'm sure they try to be fair to both sides. I'm also sure their unspoken (and often unconscious) assumptions color both their choice of stories and their coverage of stories. Your statement about Duval's "whiter, richer, less urban" demographics is an minor example of such assumptions. I'm glad to hear you're more careful when reporting than when bantering on the web, and I'm sure most reporters try to be as well. But wouldn't you be uncomfortable with the quality of the news if you knew that 9 of 10 reporters were operating from dramatically different assumptions than you were?

The STD numbers are from the state department of health's STD division, and show generally much higher rates of STDs. I would say in general that demographics probably have more to do with STD rates than the type of sex education program, just as demographics tend to have more influence on crime rates than any either "get tough on crime" or crime-prevention programs.

Gainesville is doing well. Actually, some intrepid young Republicans have just started "The Gator Standard," which has an overt conservative bias to counteract the hidden liberal bias in our paper (though when it was started, our editor, managing editor, and editorial board editor were all Republicans). It is shoddily put together and riddled with fact errors, but they hand it out on rollerblades so I'll give them points for that.

I'm curious as to why you responded to both the quotes and my writing in the second person. I'm a reporter, not an STD researcher. You might note that the goal of the study was not to gather comprehensive statistics, which is done regularly, but to interview people "on the ground" to find out what's causing a certain trend in those statistics.

Second, your media literacy seems to be badly impaired. This was a newspaper article (written by me) about a study being conducted by a UF professor. It made no editorial claims, just reported what the professor said. I'm sure she would agree with you that the stigma attached going to an STD clinic is a bigger problem than the abistinence only programs, and I certainly didn't choose the adjective "overriding" by accident. However, that is "old news" or background on the problem whereas the "new news," and most controversial part of what she was saying, was the criticism of the abistence only programs. Hence, it was higher in the story, because few people actually read to the end, and that is what I and my editors thought they would be most interested in, whether they support or oppose such programs.

Also, I feel you misunderstood the last quote. The reason why it's important to reduce STDs in men is because as long as those men are infected, they will go around having sex with women and infecting them. It has nothing to do with whether or not doctor's offices will treat STD patients (which I'm sure they have no problem doing, since it's generally a simple visit and prescription for antibiotics).

And finally, if you are a Florida resident you did pay for the study. And as a US citizen you are paying much of her salary and funding some of her other research. Sorry bud.

And thoughtful liberals feel the same way, since most newspapers are owned by a few large corporations. Both positions are understandable, though it's entirely true that most reporters are pretty liberal. In my opinion, the fact that a large group of very skeptical, very pragmatic people who are deeply involved in examining the nation's society and politics on a day-to-day basis are liberal says something about the fundamental validity of that position. Then again, I am a liberal myself, and this is where thoughtful people disagree on the subject of media bias. I wish more people on the right and left would understand that we do actually try to do our jobs and that any percieved bias is not the result of a secret conspiracy.

when it was started, our editor, managing editor, and editorial board editor were all Republicans

If memory serves, the Alligator became independent when it refused to stop publishing information about doctors willing to perform abortions, which were illegal at the time (1972, I think.) UF president O'Connell gave them an ultimatum: desist or get out. They moved off campus, and stopped taking funding from the university. The editors may have been republicans, but they weren't conservatives.

I meant when the Gator Standard was stated last year. Our paper, like the country, was probably a lot more liberal in the 1970s than it is now. In fact, NOW has a reputation in the newsroom for protesting everything we do, though my ex-girlfriend (who is a copy editor at the paper) is a NOW member and says they don't particularly hate us. Generally they get pissed when we won't publish their op-eds. But yeah, you get the point.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.