Should Circumcision Become Public Health Policy?

chart fail

damn my chart failed... looked good in the comment window haha

booo of NY @ Jan 22, 2010 15:17:17 PM

no business, no data

The CDC has no business recommending circumcision for a boy, any more than it does for a girl. There is no American data. The reason for this, is because circumcision in the US is both a cultural and a cash cow. It brings in an estimated 1 billion $ a year. And for what? The removal, or permanent damaging, of the two most sexually responsive parts of a male human body, the frenulum (ejaculatory trigger) and the inner foreskin. The AMA, AAP, and CDC refer to 'potential benefits'. Why not do a study in the US, and prove or disprove its value? Because they risk looking stupid, after over a century of propaganda against the male foreskin, and because they would open themselves to lawsuits, for

a) having known better. There is data from hundreds of countries, and only those three poorly designed African studies show a benefit. The others show circumcision to be ineffective, to useless. The HIV infection rate was lower in uncircumcised men than in circumcised men, in studies in 6 African countries.

How much did circumcision help the Americans who have died of AIDS?

Why chop for HPV, when innoculations are available for both sexes, as the absurd companion article to this one suggests?

b) violating the Hippocratic Oath (first, do no harm)

c) it is clearly unethical to remove a healthy body part from an unconsenting person, with no medical need for it.

Here is a study from a more impartial country, Australia.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/circumcision-health-benefit-virtually-nil-study-finds/article1427972/

Australia, Canada, Britain, New Zealand, and others used to practice circumcision, but found it to be ineffective. Why is its effectiveness never studied in the US, and we simply make policy based on someone else's incomplete study?

Absolutely absurd. No wonder people lose faith in American institutions.

The CDC is as busy protecting us, as the EPA was a few years ago.

I don't know how they look in the mirror, especially when they are entrusted with the public health, and do clearly boneheaded moves such as this.

The money can be better spend actually fighting disease. Yet, they choose to play games, both with our health, and our money.

Tom Tobin of MA @ Jan 22, 2010 15:11:12 PM

Not cut...

I am not cut, and I can tell you that when I talk to my cut friends, they all envy the great feeling I get when having sex with a woman, but also when I masturbate I have more feelings than my cut friends seem to have. Don't get cut.

Ted of AZ @ Jan 22, 2010 13:31:07 PM

Benefits

Hi,

This is brilliant, circumcision has three really remarkable benefits that should bear closer attention.

It keeps all the men folk pleasantly plump, delightfully slow witted, and usually quite obedient!

Sincerely

Hanns Engel

Hanns Engel of PA @ Dec 24, 2009 16:22:36 PM

Circumcision affects pleasure

Some comments include a statement that circumcision does not adversely affect sexual pleasure. I was circumcised at birth and never thought about it. But, as I got older I lost a lot of sensitivity in my penis and had a harder time staying hard and it took me longer and longer to ejaculate during sex. As soon as I learned about circumcision and foreskin restoration, I immediately began restoring my foreskin. See www.RestoringForeskin.org for info on foreskin restoration.

After I partially restored my foreskin, I noticed a big difference in sensitivity and sexual pleasure. See my blog at www.RestoringTally.com My wife used to get sore from sex and we needed lubricant. Now, she does not get sore and we don't need lubricant. We both enjoy sex a whole lot more.

The fact that some men prefer to be circumcised is fine. Brad of XX had the choice as an adult to have a circumcision. I and many others never had that choice. I would have preferred to remain intact.

Restoring Tally of TN @ Nov 22, 2009 23:57:26 PM

Circumcision

I agree with Brad from XX.

But the person stating that circumcised boys bit boobs harder and causing breast cancer is absolutley stupid. Most anyone has bitten hard, including babies. In fact, when babies start biting hard that is when many women stop breast feeding.

Find a real reason to disapprove of circumcision.

Richard of TN @ Nov 06, 2009 22:13:58 PM

Circumcision

I don't have a problem with the idea of being circumcised. I think it serves well as being healthier as far as lowering the ability to gain HIV. I can see where both the male and his partner can appreciate that. I can also see where the partner would appreciate the area of hygene. Many women could easily get turned off if the male's wee-wee stinks because of the males' lack or inability to clean certain areas.

It seems that too much selfish pleasure can put more people at risk. Many women appreciate a man who is circumcised because it makes the head more shaped and can be more effective in triggering the sensitive spots inside a female.

But since we are so sexually active I think circumcision is a great practice for curving HIV. I find it worth sacrificing some sensitivity for making the world a little healthier and safer. I think people should think more about others, rather than so much about themselves, if they are going to have sex with many people.

Richard Dawson of TN @ Nov 06, 2009 21:43:52 PM

breast cancer

circumcision Causes Breast Cancer

you break my sex toy ill break yours

resurch shower that circumcised boys bit the female tits harder

Prince Gary @ Oct 18, 2009 08:14:47 AM