We hear a lot about abstaining from alcohol, drugs, tobacco, and fats. But nothing about abstaining from sex, one behavior that actually does cause all sorts of dangerous health problems.
Granted, this issue may not affect you directly, if you’re an older person in a monogamous, long-term marriage or relationship. But it does affect young people. So make sure to share today’s Daily Dispatch with your children and even grandchildren.
Of course, this issue does affect you indirectly through your tax dollars. The government’s failure to promote abstinence does costs you money. Lots of money.
You see, abstaining from sex, or staying within a monogamous relationship, would 100 percent completely prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, as I discussed earlier this month. But instead of promoting abstinence, the government lavishes billions of tax dollars on developing dangerous, expensive drugs and vaccines for these entirely preventable diseases.
Secondly, abstinence would also completely prevent unwanted pregnancies. Aside from the moral cost, consider the social costs for just a moment. Taxpayers must pay for these unwanted pregnancies by funding controversial organizations such as Planned Parenthood (which started out historically as a eugenics program) to carry out activities that are morally objectionable to millions of taxpayers.
Third, abstinence would prevent a host of venereal infections, like the human papilloma virus (HPV), reducing the “need” for dangerous and often-ineffective vaccines like Gardasil (if there ever was a “need”).
But instead of talking about abstinence, it’s all about “promoting safe sex.”
50 percent of young girls are getting a prescription for lifelong health problems
Big pharma has no problem pushing dangerous HPV vaccines onto innocent young girls, aided and abetted by public health experts. And they have no problem pushing birth control pills on prematurely active girls, again aided and abetted by public health experts.
It turns out, many young women skip over an appropriate period of abstinence and immediately start taking hormone-altering birth control pills once they begin menarche (puberty). But this decision is a bad one for a young girl’s physical and mental health and has long-term health consequences.
You see, the onset of menarche is an important time for girls. It heralds their future fertility, but it also means much more for their health.
When puberty hits, girls start to make female hormones — which is not easy. Good health requires regular ovulation, which can take a few years to regularly establish. This time in a girl’s life is exactly the wrong time to take hormone-altering birth control pills.
First, it means these girls start young adult life at risk for many of the side effects of birth control.
Second, doctors often prescribe birth control pills to “regulate” menstrual periods. But a “pill bleed” is not the same thing as a normal menstrual period. It interferes with normal estrogen and progesterone production. In fact, when the pills artificially shut down normal menstruation and ovulation, they interfere with bone health, heart health, metabolism, and mood as well.
According to a new study, 50 percent more pre-teens and young teens (12 to 15 years) use birth control pills, injections, implants and NuvaRings than they did a decade ago.
Plus, as of last month, women can now get birth control pills over-the-counter without a doctor’s prescription in Oregon. California will soon follow suit. This misguided decision to make these pills OTC — all in the name of “women’s rights” — actually sacrifices the health of women in the name of political correctness.
Lobbyists push for increased access to the pill for reasons of political correctness. But isn’t recommending abstinence a better choice, at least for the most vulnerable 12 to 15 year old girls, when having sex is supposed to be “illegal” in any case?
It’s a prescription for lifelong health problems, not to mention the social ills that accompany this kind of “correctness.”
It astounds me they’ll talk about abstaining from all types of other “adult” behaviors or adultwork escorts — even in moderation. But they never discuss abstaining from sex.
The push to limit alcohol consumption is the most blatant bias…
Alcohol: The flip side of the abstinence argument
The government says it wants people to abstain from alcohol consumption because of the dangers of driving while intoxicated. So in many “nanny states,” they’ve pushed down the standards for “intoxication” to ridiculously low levels. In fact, in many nanny states, any man who has had two drinks and any woman who has indulged in just one drink would qualify as a “drunk driver” under some proposed new laws.
But according to the actual science, this low-to-moderate amount of alcohol does not measurably impair your ability to operate a motor vehicle or heavy machinery. Plus, research consistently shows this moderate amount of alcohol helps protect you from a number of common chronic diseases over the long-term. But being scientifically correct has nothing to do with political correctness.
Forensic science studies show the majority of vehicular accidents resulting in deaths involve drivers who are literally “blind drunk” with 10 or 12 drinks in their system. (These drivers are so drunk their two eyes can’t converge or focus. They are literally “blind drunk.”)
Ironically, I see a lot of drivers today given licenses today who should never drive — even when stone sober. For example, when I was out in California with my daughter, the local DMV (one of the most corrupt government operations I have ever personally witnessed) had driver’s license applications available in every language but English. Last I checked, the road signs are all in English — even in California. No wonder they have so many traffic problems out there.
Like so many other health issues, when it comes to abstinence, I’m afraid political correctness counts more in this country than scientific correctness. So stay tuned to my Daily Dispatch and Insiders’ Cures newsletter as we bypass politics to uncover the real facts that affect your health.
- “Oral contraceptive use and bone density in adolescent and young adult women,” Contraception 2010 Jan; 81(1): 35-40
- “Oral contraceptive pill use is associated with localized decreases in cortical thickness,” Human Brain Mapping 2015 Jul;36(7) 2644-54
- “Trends and patterns of hormonal contraceptive prescribing for adolescents in primary care in the U.K.” J Family Planning Reprod Health Care, 2015, July; 41(3): 216-22