MrDarwin

I call 'em as I see 'em.

Does circumcision cause any lasting harm? Well, try asking any boy or man who has been circumcised as an infant whether his life would be any better if he had not been circumcised. He cannot answer the question.

Aside from the risk or medical complications (which really do happen; can I stress enough that this is neither medically necessary nor risk-free surgery???) my biggest objection to circumcision is that the decision is made for rather than by the person who is affected by it, frequently for no other reason than that daddy is also circumcised. The child has no say in the matter, and is quite unable to make an informed decision; by the time he could, it's too late. Children are not property, parts of whose bodies can be unnecessarily amputated (is that a neutral and rhetoric-free enough term?) at their parents' will or whim.

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: MrDarwin ]</p>

Krieger

One last thing, about that "making fun of your child in the locker room stuff". That never happened to me, and at my school we used to go swimming at a local pool once a week for about five or six years. We would always change cloths in a big locker room. Not once did anyone ever make fun of me or some of my friends (who also happened to not be circumsized). Infact almost half the people there were not circumsized. So don't believe those crazy doctors tales.

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: Krieger ]</p>

alek0

Krieger,
I don't beleive that nonsense (grew up in a country where almost all males are intact), but obviously some people do.

As for doctor's attitude, I would like to encourage anyone to check the board for medical professional at <a href="http://www.obgyn.net," target="_blank">www.obgyn.net,</a> search for circumcision and see what they have to say. Personally, I think that some of those callous bastards should be banned from practicing medicine.
Here are some examples:

Debate started with:
"This post is not being brought up to debate whether to circ or not, but to ask if any, many, most or none of ya'll are using local anesthesia for newborn circs. Being a dinosaur, I don't, and have not ever seen it done. "

"I put the penis on stretch and inject about 0.1 to o.2 cc of local subcutaneously( Not into the substance of the corpus cavernosum!) at the junction of the penile root and the baby's pubis in the 11 and 1oclock position. Then, I arrange all the instruments, chat to the nurse for a few minutes, and then do the circ. I use a Mogen Clamp. Some kids are quieter, some still scream bloody murder, but I feel better and the nurse thinks I'm such a "sensitive guy!" "

"Clearly it is far less discomfort than without anesthesia. I have shown the procedure to about 6 residents/interns; but none are interested in doing it. "

"NEVER use cautery... we had one case in LA where a surgery resident fried the whole "thing" and the baby had to be raised a girl, as I remember. "

"Where I trained we didn't do a lot of circs because medicaid didn't pay for them, but we routinely used a 1% lidocaine without epi subcutanously at the base of the dorsum of the penis. When I started at Northside the nurses thought I was a freak. So to play the party line, I started doing circs sans lidocaine. The babies reacted the same. Yes I've read the studies re: increase stress hormones, and yes these boys are feeling more pain, but subq shots hurt too. The only complaint I've ever had on a circ was the nasty bruise the subq lidocaine makes. "

"he relayed this story of a pediatrician who was excited that his extra
effort in trimming foreskins allowed him to buy a volksvagen for his son to
use. "
----------------------------------------

Am I the only one who thinks this is really, really sick?

Anunnaki

This is bullshit. My circumcision was too tight and has caused my penis to develop a downward bend when erect. I assure you that not only can I answer the question,but can tell you that my life would indeed be different if I was not circumcised.

I mentioned this earlier in this thread,but I guess you guys just ignored it. Big surprise.

Anyone who doesn`t believe me can come over here and check it out. You can get down on your knees and get in real close and I`ll slap you on the forehead with it.

I can not believe that this ridiculous discussion is still going on. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

tronvillain

I just went back and found the post where you said that - I must have missed it the first time. Not that I'm surprised by it - I recall that being listed as a possible complication of circumcision.

Oolon Colluphid

Ref Jaliet and Tronvillain’s posts on HIV, there was a Horizon (called Nova in the States I believe) or similar prog a while back on this. It seems that one village, where the tradition was to cut, had a far lower incidence of HIV infection than the next-door village, where they didn’t cut. The prog started by following a bunch of folks from the uncut village traipsing to the other one to be done. After much to-ing and fro-ing, it emerged that HIV normally gains entry best by coming into contact with mucous membranes (vagina, rectum, mouth); the researchers realised that the inside of the foreskin is also a mucous membrane. Remove that, and you remove an obvious means of viral ingress. Seemed to be the reason in these African villages.

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_782000/782656.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_782000/782656.stm</a>

However, a google search for HIV and circumcision brings up lots of stuff, none of which seems conclusive either way.

Oolon

Oolon Colluphid

I don't mean to argue if you know it's due to it, but thats a condition called chordee, which is often (but not necessarily) associated with hypospadias: a congenital condition, and nothing to do with the circumcision itself. Worth considering?

And apparently, since the bend adds extra width, it's actually rather good from the woman's point of view (and indeed, the man's, since it pushes the underside of the glans down harder against the vaginal wall), so you may be better off then you realise!

Oolon

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: Oolon Colluphid ]</p>

alek0

Huh? Hypospadia is a birth defect where urethral opening is not at the centre. What that has to do with curving of the penis, which is a known complication of circumcision?

As for studies on HIV and circumcision, if you actually read those papers, you can see for yourself that the methods are questionable and the results are peculiar. Take for example:
TITLE: Male circumcision and susceptibility to HIV infection among men in Tanzania.
AUTHOR: Urassa,-M; Todd,-J; Boerma,-J-T; Hayes,-R; Isingo,-R
SOURCE: AIDS. 1997 Jan; 11(1): 73-9.

"In north-western Tanzania, circumcision was previously restricted to Muslims and specific ethnic groups, but is now more widespread, particularly in urban areas and among more educated men. Assessment of the reliability and validity of self-reported circumcision status showed that these data could be considered fairly accurate, although there was some tendency for circumcision to be over-reported. On univariate analysis, circumcision status was unrelated to HIV prevalence in most studies. After controlling for confounding variables, however, there was a modest but significant reduction of the HIV prevalence among circumcised men [odds ratio (OR), 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.48-0.81]. This effect appeared stronger in urban areas (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.32-0.68) and roadside villages (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.42-1.01) than in rural areas and islands (OR, 1.00 and 1.01 respectively)."

If you look at closely not only at relative risk but also confidence interval, there is protective effect only in the cities. Something special about city foreskins, or what?

Let's examine the statement "Univariate analysis..."

This means that when they compare the rates between circumcised and intact there is no difference. Then they apply the golden rule of medical "science" : "If you torture the data long enough they will confess" and proceed with multivariate analysis on SELF-REPORTED number of partners and SELFREPORTED visits to prostitutes and they find differences. Hmmmmm... Guys are known for honest replys to two questions above (NOT!). In many studies, including this one, circumcision was selfreported, too.

Many of the studies which claim to have found protective effect have P value higher than 0.05 which means "results are not statistically significant".

And considering the number of circumcised men in the world which are infected with HIV, it is obvious that circumcision does not prevent HIV transmission.

Oolon Colluphid

alek0:

Ref HIV transmission: &lt;shrugs&gt; Yeah okay, if you say so. I was just reporting what I'd seen and read, since it had relevance. It's no skin off my nose if it's wrong.

Everything, pal. From the <a href="http://www.duj.com/hypospadias.html" target="_blank">Digital Urology Journal</a>:

Looking into it further, it does seem that non-hypospadias chordee is mostly due to circumcision (though not always). So it depends on why the person is now de facto circumcised. It may be as a result of corrective hypospadias surgery. Hence the suggestion. Got it now?

My second paragraph, emphasising a possible accidental advantage, still stands.

Oolon

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: Oolon Colluphid ]</p>

alek0

I would think that if he had a corrective surgery for hypospadia, he could certainly tell, since there would be scars.

And concerning second paragraph, at least half of it (from woman's point of view) doesn't stand