Verified by 
Are teenagers who wait longer than other teenagers to have sex less likely to practice safe sex in their lives?
One of the arguments put forth by proponents of abstinence only sex education is that it will delay people from having sex (which might not even be the case). While they believe early sex is a negative for many religious and moral reasons, I would presume that they also think this keeps teenagers safer. If they aren't having sex until a later age, there is less chance they will engage in sexual risk-taking, right?
Well, not exactly. According to a new study headed by a psychology professor at The University of South Florida (Maria Bornovalova), early sexual activity does not appear to cause sexual risk taking. Specifically, when they compared pairs of identical twins - only one of which had sex prior to age 16 - they had merely identical incidents of sexual risk taking (i.e, unsafe sex, using drugs during sex, multiple partners) in their life. Over 1000 pairs of twins were studied.
So what does appear to cause sexual risk taking? According to this study, social factors, such as low income and a poor home life, and genetics are much stronger predictors of sexual risk taking than early sexual behavior.
The authors of the study point out that there could be other negative side effects of having sex early, such as it's association with depression.
But, according to the authors, when it comes to sexual risk taking, if we want to promote safer sex, waiting until a later age to have sex does not appear to be a solution.
