50% of Black Teen Girls have an STD NEW CDC STUDY

[tre2k4]

If its a lie then whats the truth?

If its in favor of us do we believe it?

If all the researchers were black would yall believe?

Im not getting the answers needed. Its called a research. If you dont like the numbers, do your own research. This should inspire more blacks to be researchers if they think the numbers put out for them are wrong. If you say its wrong just because its big than thats not enough to go against the actual study if you dont provide proof.

 

[jwilliam85]

I believe that the STD rates in this study are grossly inflated and not based on good science. Show me the way the data was collected, without data those numbers don't mean a damn thing. I already gave a lengthy post as to just a few of the MANY ways this data can be manipulated.

Let me ask YOU a question, do you honestly believe that black people are at the top of EVERY negative statistic in this country? You don't question these numbers at all. I mean, in EVERY "study" black people don't lead by a few points, we are always double or triple the average rate for EVERYTHING and the projected percentages are ALWAYS outlandishly huge. Maybe you didn't read the article and just cosigned the title of the post, but it says HALF of all black girls between the ages of 14 and 19 that are sexually active (and it made a point of saying not just intercourse, but sexually active in ANY way) have had an STD. That is a bold statement that very few legitimate scientists would make without presenting some strong evidence. A survey of 800 non-descript girls from who knows where and in who knows what situation socially and economically is NOT strong enough evidence to run with this shit. Do you understand what kind of margin of error is involved when you take a sample of 800 people to represent 3 MILLION?

And what about the percentages, the article says NOTING about whether they broke the group down demographically based upon population numbers. What if 400 of the girls were black? Wouldn't that skew a bit since half of the population of teenage girls in that age bracket aren't black? What assumptions were made? Was it assumed that there are more sexually active black girls in that age group than white or hispanic? What scientific basis does that assumption have? If you don't know what percentage of white/black/hispanic girls are sexually active in that age group, you can't break the three groups down to extrapolate the numnbers out to an entire population. What was the geographic breakdown? Was this all done in a single metropolitan area. Were cross sections taken from across the country in rural, medium sized cities, suburban areas, metro areas. What income levels were the samples taken from? Like I said before, are they comparing poor black girls form South Philly to wealthy white girls form Vermont?

How many more questions would you like for me to ask? Or should I just take this BS on blind faith because it was published. The Bell Curve was published too.

Cool, so what do you think about black girls and STD's do you think it's OK, it could be better, or out of control?

Oh and I didn't say I believed the article when it said it was 50% I just simply said I believe the STD rate is high among our women.

 

[jwilliam85]

If its a lie then whats the truth?

If its in favor of us do we believe it?

If all the researchers were black would yall believe?

Im not getting the answers needed. Its called a research. If you dont like the numbers, do your own research. This should inspire more blacks to be researchers if they think the numbers put out for them are wrong. If you say its wrong just because its big than thats not enough to go against the actual study if you dont provide proof.

Wish I said this 5 post ago.

 

[Makkonnen]

Organizational Research: Determining Appropriate Sample Size in Survey Research Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal

Quote from the above document

The bottom line is simple: research studies take
substantial time and effort on the part of
researchers. .....When selecting an appropriate
sample size for a study is relatively easy, why
wouldn’t a researcher want to do it right?

More information
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)


How many black teenage women in the US?
What's the appropriate sample size for study to achieve a minimal margin of error?

Hey Im not a researcher or statistician so maybe I'm off here but a sample size of 838(838 women surveyed)for a population size of millions seems pretty fucked.

Maybe some researchers or mathematicians can shed some light. Looks dubious as fuck to me. Margin of error?

 

[Zero]

Cool, so what do you think about black girls and STD's do you think it's OK, it could be better, or out of control?

Oh and I didn't say I believed the article when it said it was 50% I just simply said I believe the STD rate is high among our women.

Are you implying I'm in favor of kids getting STD's because I raised questions about these stats?

Rates in general have gone up for ALL races because all of the focus went to HIV prevention and other STD's have been downplayed as not a big deal. There is a HUGE gap between addressing the issue of STD's and sensationalistic shit like this "study". You want things to get better, tell the asshole politicians in your state and the school board to grow their balls back and put health classes back in middle and high schools instead of this psuedo-Christian denial theology they like to teach these days.

 

[Zero]

If its a lie then whats the truth?

If its in favor of us do we believe it?

If all the researchers were black would yall believe?

Im not getting the answers needed. Its called a research. If you dont like the numbers, do your own research. This should inspire more blacks to be researchers if they think the numbers put out for them are wrong. If you say its wrong just because its big than thats not enough to go against the actual study if you dont provide proof.

Name ONE study that has EVER favored black people. You don't know how the research was structured, so YOU are the one blindly buying into it. If you think it's feasible that the black race has somehow managed to bust the curve in every negative societal category, cool, that's on you.

 

[Anothermind]

How about you guys go question them personally

http://www.cdc.gov/stdconference/2008/media/release-11march2008.htm


phone number, address, and STD prevention conference info listed on the site.

 

[Garifuna]

I don't know whether the study is valid or not.

I just want to point out that in the science of sampling, the sample size is independent of the population size - assuming that the sample is random, and the population is normally distributed.

Those are two BIG assumptions, which is why I can't comment on the study. I just want to point out that IF those assumptions are true, then 838 is a valid sample size.

COLIN POWELL can stop reading now.

Normally distributed means that STDs are found everywhere, and are just as likely to be found among north and south, east and west, urban and rural, young and old, rich and poor, educated and uneducated, moral and slutty, Black and white, etc.

We know this isn't true, because the study suggests that STDs are more common among Blacks than Whites, and more common among older women than teens. So, the study was limited to Black teens, thereby eliminating the race and age parameters. Problem is, what makes white teens different than Black teens? Unless it is something that no white teen has and all Black teens have, then there is reason to doubt that there is a normal distribution of Black teens.

For example, STD might be more common among Christian Black teens than among Muslim Black teens, or more common among Double Dutch jumpers than among Hop Scotch jumpers. If there is some correlation between STDs and some other factor besides race, then it is important that that other factor be uniformly distributed through the population. In my examples, the distribution of Christians is fairly uniform, while the distribution of Muslims is not. Similarly, Hop Scotch is played all over, while Double Dutch is not.

Back to sampling - the sampler has to ensure that the sample is random and normally distributed partly by taking enough samples in enough places in a random manner. The less confidence there is that the population distribution is random, the larger the sample size needs to be.

Without reading the actual study, I can't determine the validity of the study. Furthermore, the usual way to determine the validity of the study is to have someone else repeat the study and get the same results.

Call me when that happens.

 

[Makkonnen]

I don't know whether the study is valid or not.

I just want to point out that in the science of sampling, the sample size is independent of the population size - assuming that the sample is random, and the population is normally distributed.

Those are two BIG assumptions, which is why I can't comment on the study. I just want to point out that IF those assumptions are true, then 838 is a valid sample size.

COLIN POWELL can stop reading now.

Normally distributed means that STDs are found everywhere, and are just as likely to be found among north and south, east and west, urban and rural, young and old, rich and poor, educated and uneducated, moral and slutty, Black and white, etc.

We know this isn't true, because the study suggests that STDs are more common among Blacks than Whites, and more common among older women than teens. So, the study was limited to Black teens, thereby eliminating the race and age parameters. Problem is, what makes white teens different than Black teens? Unless it is something that no white teen has and all Black teens have, then there is reason to doubt that there is a normal distribution of Black teens.

For example, STD might be more common among Christian Black teens than among Muslim Black teens, or more common among Double Dutch jumpers than among Hop Scotch jumpers. If there is some correlation between STDs and some other factor besides race, then it is important that that other factor be uniformly distributed through the population. In my examples, the distribution of Christians is fairly uniform, while the distribution of Muslims is not. Similarly, Hop Scotch is played all over, while Double Dutch is not.

Back to sampling - the sampler has to ensure that the sample is random and normally distributed partly by taking enough samples in enough places in a random manner. The less confidence there is that the population distribution is random, the larger the sample size needs to be.

Without reading the actual study, I can't determine the validity of the study. Furthermore, the usual way to determine the validity of the study is to have someone else repeat the study and get the same results.

Call me when that happens.

Thank you for that clarification. Excellent post Garifuna.

 

[Gods_Debris]

Here's an interesting thought, multiply the 20% of White American girls by the number of White Americans and then do the same w/ the 50% percent of Black American girls and the number of Black Americans... I bet that looks crazy​

 

[water]

Thank you for that clarification. Excellent post Garifuna.

BGOL has all it needs for war on ignorance......

Good post, Garifuna

 

[tre2k4]

Name ONE study that has EVER favored black people. You don't know how the research was structured, so YOU are the one blindly buying into it. If you think it's feasible that the black race has somehow managed to bust the curve in every negative societal category, cool, that's on you.

I didn't say I agree with it. Im saying the only reason we dismiss the study is because its high for us. I wonder what people go by if they dont believe a number.

 

[Zero]

I didn't say I agree with it. Im saying the only reason we dismiss the study is because its high for us. I wonder what people go by if they dont believe a number.

A number without any data behind it means nothing and the simple fact is, we get 3 or 4 studies every year that project the black race as being wildly out of proportion in every possible negative category. I find that in itself suspect. Another thing that bothers me is that these stats come out for these studies and they are NEVER verified or challenged, they are simply accepted as gospel. Folks question the science behind global warming even though there is pretty tangible evidence that SOMETHING is wrong, yet they accept stats like these COMPLETELY on face value. What was posted was not a study, it was an article with some numbers and nothing supporting them. I went to the link on the site, I'm curious why they would not have the actual report on this study published. Seems to me that ANY scientist worth a damn would want his research published and reviewed, without critical review, it's NOT science, it's number crunching and numbers can be crunched to produce all kinds of results.

 

[water]

I didn't say I agree with it. Im saying the only reason we dismiss the study is because its high for us. I wonder what people go by if they dont believe a number.

You are a trip.........

After reading 3 pages, you have the nerve to say that "the only reason" is because its high for us???




How old are you???

 

[BusterHymen]

Half you brothas are real defensive about this subject... Prob because you have an STD yo damn self.. RAW-DOGGERS

 

[Stress]

I swear,niggas love being in denial..Now I know a lot of you dudes live in a fantasy world where you think porn chicks are "wifey" material and every black woman is a "queen" or whatever..But the harsh reality is,there are a lot of black young,lil' skanks out here in the game now..And the result is a lot of babies out of wedlock and a bunch of diseases....2 plus 2 equals 4 niggas ..Damn.

 

[tre2k4]

You are a trip.........

After reading 3 pages, you have the nerve to say that "the only reason" is because its high for us???




How old are you???

So its ok to dismiss the study all together
Im not worried about the numbers. Whether its true or not, STDs is still an issue. Why focus on the messenger than the main problem. Im more concern about the teens getting STDs than a percentage.

 

[BUU]

Fuck this shit!! Just wrap it up! And quit using cheap condoms!

 

[360KNOWLEDGE]

CDC studies = agendas = MORE U.S. GOVT BULLSHIT

 

[kinglickk]

This is junk science. All of these studies that make assumptions about millions of people by observing a few are garbage. Nothing is done with the data other than publishing it and causing some short-term hype. I guess it was nice of them to stop at half of all teenage black girls, usually these studies will have some outlandish fuckin' number like 65-70% when they address black issues.

this is some bullshit! 838 girls are representing the entire nation. Who is the fucking statistician on this? I talked to a friend who is big into stats and she say it's all bullshit!!!

 

[Garifuna]

Its called a research. If you dont like the numbers, do your own research. This should inspire more blacks to be researchers if they think the numbers put out for them are wrong. If you say its wrong just because its big than thats not enough to go against the actual study if you dont provide proof.

Right On !!!

 

[water]

CDC studies = agendas = MORE U.S. GOVT BULLSHIT

Disease rates were significantly higher among black girls — nearly half had at least one STD, versus 20 percent among both whites and Mexican-Americans.

HPV, the cancer-causing virus, can also cause genital warts but often has no symptoms. A vaccine targeting several HPV strains recently became available, but Douglas said it probably hasn't yet had much impact on HPV prevalence rates in teen girls.

The CDC recommends the three-dose HPV vaccine for girls ages 11-12 and catch-up shots for ages 13-26.

 

[Zero]

I swear,niggas love being in denial..Now I know a lot of you dudes live in a fantasy world where you think porn chicks are "wifey" material and every black woman is a "queen" or whatever..But the harsh reality is,there are a lot of black young,lil' skanks out here in the game now..And the result is a lot of babies out of wedlock and a bunch of diseases....2 plus 2 equals 4 niggas ..Damn.

Yeah bruh, they are all just out there selling their asses for blunts

 

[Zero]

So its ok to dismiss the study all together
Im not worried about the numbers. Whether its true or not, STDs is still an issue. Why focus on the messenger than the main problem. Im more concern about the teens getting STDs than a percentage.

If the science is shakey, YES, you throw the whole study away. You don't need some outlandish fuckin' stat to raise awareness of an issue.

 

[afroyale]

Y'all still don't believe black teen girls are fucking like crazy?

I'll tell you what ... denial is a not a river in Egypt.

 

[Makkonnen]

So its ok to dismiss the study all together

No.

Im not worried about the numbers. Whether its true or not, STDs is still an issue.

The whole point of the study is numbers. We want to adequately gauge the problem we face. Different problems require different solutions.

Why focus on the messenger than the main problem. Im more concern about the teens getting STDs than a percentage.

I know this reply wasn't directed at me. I am more concerned about the teens than I am concerned about the study in general. But we have a problem here. If 50% of all teenage africanamericans have an std then that is a tremendously large problem, a problem with serious ramifications, a problem larger than Obama or Jena. I want to know how good the data provided is because it has deadly serious consequences for us as a group.

 

[CeeloChamp]

This is junk science. All of these studies that make assumptions about millions of people by observing a few are garbage. Nothing is done with the data other than publishing it and causing some short-term hype. I guess it was nice of them to stop at half of all teenage black girls, usually these studies will have some outlandish fuckin' number like 65-70% when they address black issues.

exactly just cuz 26% of one group of 8 hundred something teen girls have stds dosent mean that 26% of another group of 8 hundred something teens would have stds, the next group might just have 1%

 

[tre2k4]

So whats the solution?

 

[Built4Life]

That goes without saying, but having these ridiculous stats thrown at your kids constantly is NOT productive. Cats kill me saying bogus information doesn't matter, it does. If you are OK with the media giving your kids a million reasons to believe they will fail, that's on you. Why don't they do a study that explains why the SAME behaviors in black people seem to get a different result than they do in non-blacks (according to these studies). I have had the conversation a million times with friends of mine that we were told in the late 80's that like 70% (or some other ungodly HUGE number) of us would not make it to 25 alive, that half of us were supposed to be closet homos spreading HIV to the world, that damn near NONE of use were supposed to have fathers. that damn near ALL of us would do some jail time, etc, etc, etc. Funny thing is, none of us fell into ANY of those categories, so we don't exist statistically because there are so few of us statistically that there is just no way four or five of us could ever be in the same place at the same time and actually KNOW each other.

I agree, but I wholeheartedly believe in protecting yourself against STI's and pregnancy. I am not sure about the numbers, but there should be an emphasis on preventative care in regards to sex because you aren't going to stop teens from having sex. It has always been that way and it will continue to be that way. As long as they know the methods by which they can engage in sexual activity in a healthy and responsible manner then it is all good. One of the many problems that occurs is the disinformation about sex and the value placed on not having sex as if it is a bad thing.

 

[Zero]

So whats the solution?

I agree, but I wholeheartedly believe in protecting yourself against STI's and pregnancy. I am not sure about the numbers, but there should be an emphasis on preventative care in regards to sex because you aren't going to stop teens from having sex. It has always been that way and it will continue to be that way. As long as they know the methods by which they can engage in sexual activity in a healthy and responsible manner then it is all good. One of the many problems that occurs is the disinformation about sex and the value placed on not having sex as if it is a bad thing.

I think the solution is to go BACK to teaching a COMPLETE safe sex curriculum in schools and going back to illustrating how these other "lesser" STD's are no joke. The emphasis on HIV prevention was necessary, I realize that, but all the other dangers out there have been basically ignored and down played because they can't kill you. When I was in high school back in the 80's, cats wore condoms because the clap HURT, because herpes HURT, because they saw pics of siphillis spirochetes and genital warts in health class and that shit wasn't pretty. Kids think they are invincible and HIV isn't as much of a reality to them as nasty sores on your genitals or pissing razor blades for a week. If you are avoiding getting gonorrhea or herpes, AIDS becomes a non-issue. But if you don't address the fact that just because they can be cured or treated, they are still around, people will still be like "Yeah, I got chlamydia, but it could have been worse". People nowadays think getting siphillis is "dodging a bullet", they didn't think that before the HIV crisis.

 

[tre2k4]

Its some stuff you can catch even if you aint sexually active.

 

[360KNOWLEDGE]

Disease rates were significantly higher among black girls — nearly half had at least one STD, versus 20 percent among both whites and Mexican-Americans.

HPV, the cancer-causing virus, can also cause genital warts but often has no symptoms. A vaccine targeting several HPV strains recently became available, but Douglas said it probably hasn't yet had much impact on HPV prevalence rates in teen girls.

The CDC recommends the three-dose HPV vaccine for girls ages 11-12 and catch-up shots for ages 13-26.

BINGO !!!! I was just about to talk about that aspect. Do you remember that the Gov. of Texas, this year implemented an executive order which stated that all teenage girls in Texas will have to receive the HPV vaccine? Why do the powers that be want to give out this vaccine soooooo bad?? Well, we know the answer.

 

[Zero]

Its some stuff you can catch even if you aint sexually active.

That's life, can't live in fear. All you can really do is the basic common sense shit to protect yourself, if you still end up shooting snake eyes, you gotta chock it up to life. Hell, just last week I walked out on my front porch, hit a patch of ice and ended up with three cracked ribs. Shit pissed me off because I went from doing my thing to barely being able to wipe my own ass in less than one second. Shit is fucked up, but that's life. Hell, I had the bag of rock salt in my hand when I busted my ass and was about to salt the steps so my kids wouldn't bust THEIR asses in the morning heading to school. You put on a condom and still end up with some shit, all you can do is chock it up to bad luck I guess. Hell, cats talk shit about marriage, but on that tip, I'm happy as shit I can do my thing and not be stressed after the fact. You gotta be careful, but you still gotta live. If I just stayed in the house that day, I would have never gotten hurt, but maybe it would have been one of my kids in the morning and maybe it would have been a cracked skull instead of cracked ribs.

 

[Cannibal]

I refuse to believe black women fuck any more than them cave bitches do. And hispanics aren't too far away, they just as uneducated and fucked up as blacks. Young folks have sex, black, white, hispanic, asians, whatever. I smell Tuskee project or bullshit, possibly both.

 

[I Hate U!!]

lol @ simps who believes whitey's stats. white hoes be having all kinds of STD's, but they would rather put us in a negative light.