Circumcision and AIDS, medical community gives a verdict~

[Raerae]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070223/...Ub5k1bPMWM0 F

We've discussed this b4 in the past, with both sides pro and against circumcision giving their reasons. But it seems the medical community has gone past saying it's possable, and is comcluding that circumcision is a valid method to helping reduce the spread of HIV.

Hopefully, when used in conjunction with safe sex and abstinence teaching, we can see the epidemic rates begin to decline world wide.

 

[lemurian]

Ugh.. if circumcision curbed HIV infection you wouldn't see such high numbers of infected persons in the US. A huge majority of adult males born here were circumcised (upwards of 95% in the 60s!). There are obviously easier ways to avoid infection without resorting to mutilation. They might as well be saying that women could avoid getting HIV by having their vaginas sewn shut. Which is a relatively common practice in Africa, by the way. What are your thoughts on that?

 

[Vixen]

Honestly, it's difficult for me to believe this considering all the articles I've read over the years that the foreskin actually protects against stds/aids.
The most compelling evidence for me was the Mischa study that failed to find that circumcision protects against aids/stds.

http://www.docguide.com/news/content...2571CD005207D9

More links:
http://www.circumstitions.com/HIV-valley.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8473838/
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/vanhowe4/
http://www.mgmbill.org/aids.htm
http://www.circinfo.org/hiv.html

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemurian Ugh.. if circumcision curbed HIV infection you wouldn't see such high numbers of infected persons in the US. A huge majority of adult males born here were circumcised (upwards of 95% in the 60s!).

Actually comparitive to the % of infected population in Africa, the US infection rate is rather low. And you not reading the article. They aren't saying, "If you get circumcised, you wont get a STD." They are saying that you have a lower chance on contracting the virus then those who are un circumcised, if you engage in high risk sexual activity. If this article is true, the infection rate in the USA would be much higher than it already is.

In addition, you can't really compare developed nations where condoms are easily obtained, to undeveloped countries where they are not. The use of a condom is going to reduce the effectiveness of circumcision when compared to the entire population. As the condom use alone if going to reduce the chance of infection, resulting in a smaller exposed population.

Quote:

There are obviously easier ways to avoid infection without resorting to mutilation. They might as well be saying that women could avoid getting HIV by having their vaginas sewn shut. Which is a relatively common practice in Africa, by the way. What are your thoughts on that?

Well, considering I mentioned in addition to Abstinence/Safe Sex teaching, it's obviously not the only way to prevent the transmission of the virus. And just like safe sex, it's not 100% protection. Abstinence and fidelity is the only way to guarentee safety from infection, but is that really going to happen? No where is the medical community saying, if you get circumcised, you won't get a STD.

And the other practice you mentioned, the sewing, isn't really comparable to male curcumcision. There is a very large difference between the physical effects of femal circumcisions and other practices involving female genatalia, and those done on men. For Male circumcision to be even comparable to anything done to female genetalia, you would have to comlpetey remove the tip of the penis during curcumcision.

 

[Raerae]

There is also obviously other factors that contribute to the spread of HIV, that are independent of circumcision. Number of sexual partners, the type of partners ( males who frequent prostitutes are at a higher risk, then those who dont for example), availibility of condoms/safe sex education in the region, etc.

The effects of circumcision will be lower in populations that take more preventative measures. Abstinence, fidelity, safe sex, etc. Than in those populations who dont.

I do agree, it is difficult to see how effective a given measure is, when not all the variables of the study are availible. Statistics typically tell the story you want them to tell.

 

[glamdoll]

My son was circumsized I dunno why really just that my husbands whole family was..
and when I told my father who is a mexican he was angry..
he said " why dont you go cut off on of your breast? what if they cut your skin down there off?"
my mother in law said it was no big deal and no difference at all

so i dunno but the doctor said he will have lower chance of getting an UDI or something like that..

my mother in laws father got one at the age of 70 and had to be circumsized at that age and its more traumatic then.. so
yeah..

 

[giz2000]

My husband and both of my sons are circumcised...it's just something the men in my family do...I never considered NOT doing it...I can guarantee you that they have no recollection of that event...

 

[little teaser]

both of my sons and husband are circumcised.. i have dated a guy once that wasnt and i can def say that when there not it gross and smells not clean at all.. i can see how it harbor germs, i would def never be with some one or have sex with someone that was un circumcised unless there was two condoms on there and def no oral.. ewww

 

[lemurian]

Oh good LORD! The vast majority of males on this planet are not circumcised -- the US is the only country that routinely allows this for non-religious reasons. There is no solid evidence that circumcision has any medical benefit at all, and most doctors today will tell you as much. How any mother can opt to have their newborn's genitals surgically modified FOR NO REASON is beyond me... To think that they cannot feel it is absurd, and to think that it cannot cause them irreversible harm is absolutely ignorant.

Personally, having been with men who were both circumcised and not, I have to say that I very much prefer the latter, and that an uncircumcised penis is no more unhygienic than a circumcised penis -- it is all about personal care habits. Consider how comparatively disgusting women's genitals must seem We all know (at least I hope we do) that it's important to keep clean and so do most uncut men. Furthermore, many women prefer sex with uncut men for a number of reasons, myself included. AND there have been studies done that indicate that uncircumcised men are LESS likely to acquire a variety of STDs, because secretions beneath the foreskin have antibacterial and antiviral properties, much like in a healthy female's vagina. Although, considering the number of advertisements I see for douches, feminine deodorant sprays and yeast infection treatments, it would seem to me that most women don't know what a healthy vagina is. IMO common sense regarding our own health has gone completely out the window and this is just another example.

I anxiously await the day that the practice of circumcision becomes illegal.

 

[Shimmer]

Any of y'all ever talked to a man who has had complications from being uncut?
I scrubbed numerous adult circs and unanimously, every one of them said that they wished, from the time they knew the difference, that they'd been cut at a young age. Lemurian, it's not for "no reason". Quite honestly, the number of boys who have serious UTIs, pain while urinating, adult males who have painful erections, who can't enjoy sex because the glans is so sensitive, who can't even masturbate without causing a certain amount of pain is rather high, and I suspect they would disagree with you that there's "no reason".
It's not cruel.
It's not excrutiatingly painful.
It's not disgusting.
It's not heartless.
It's not anything mean. There's nothing wrong with doing it.

Conversely, there's nothing wrong with NOT doing it, provided that proper care and training for care is provided to the child.

 

[little teaser]

i think its cruel to not have your child circumcised

 

[lemurian]

*retracting mean comment*

 

[lemurian]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer Quite honestly, the number of boys who have serious UTIs, pain while urinating, adult males who have painful erections, who can't enjoy sex because the glans is so sensitive, who can't even masturbate without causing a certain amount of pain is rather high

I'd love to see stats on this. You're not the only person who has worked in the medical field.

Also: You're aware of the fact that these men who wish they had been circumcised STILL CAN BE, right? Isn't it better to give a person a choice of whether or not to have their penis cut and permanantly disfigured?

As for having a child circumcised just because their father is, how is that any different from something we've discussed previously - deaf or otherwise disabled parents wishing to have their children genetically modified to be similarly disabled? Is that not cruel?

Frankly the stats disprove the idea that circumcision is not cruel or without consequence. Having a foreskin is healthy and normal, and is seldomly dysfunctional.. no more often than the occurance of any other birth defect.

 

[Shimmer]

I'm aware of that.
ASK them.
ASK men who have had it done as an adult, and ask them why.

 

[lemurian]

I don't know any men who have been circumcised as an adult, only lots of men who are disgusted at the idea of being circumcised at all and infuriated by the casual, routine circumcision of secular babies in the US.

Sorry for all the editting, this subject just gets me all flustered!

Edited to say: I can see how being in the field for long periods without opportunity to bathe can be disadvantageous for some men who weren't circumcised, but also for EVERYONE'S feet Obviously certain circumstances that cause generally ill health may have more unseemly effects on the uncut (and women) as opposed to the cut.

 

[Shimmer]

I know men who've been circ'd as adults. Their parents had the v ery militant stance you do regarding circs, and refused to have it done, so from the time they were small until they were old enough to make the decision on their own they had problems, and pain, unnecessarily (in their eyes).
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that decrying it as cruel and unusual punishment is a pretty broadbased statement.

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemurian Edited to say: I can see how being in the field for long periods without opportunity to bathe can be disadvantageous for some men who weren't circumcised, but also for EVERYONE'S feet Obviously certain circumstances that cause generally ill health may have more unseemly effects on the uncut (and women) as opposed to the cut.

Well considering where the advocating an increase in circumcision, AFRICA! Look at the conditions people live in in many parts of that continent. You really think daily bathing with soap and water happens? What about the areas of the continent with little to no plumbing?

Having clean running water is a MIRACLE when compared to what much of the world's population has. Keeping clean isn't always as easy and turning on a faucet and grabbing a wash cloth.

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by little teaser both of my sons and husband are circumcised.. i have dated a guy once that wasnt and i can def say that when there not it gross and smells not clean at all.. i can see how it harbor germs, i would def never be with some one or have sex with someone that was un circumcised unless there was two condoms on there and def no oral.. ewww

Yeh, I would totally end a relationship over circumcision. I'm totally grossed out by a un-cut penis lol.

And using 2 condoms is actually more likeley to cause a tear in the condom, than using 1. You should NEVER use more than 1 condom at a time. The friction between the 2 condoms greatly increases the odds of having a condom tear, and exposing you to possible pregnancy, and STD's. Just a FYI!

 

[YvetteJeannine]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemurian AND there have been studies done that indicate that uncircumcised men are LESS likely to acquire a variety of STDs, because secretions beneath the foreskin have antibacterial and antiviral properties, much like in a healthy female's vagina.

If possible, could you cite where that information came from? I'd like to see more about that...Thanks

 

[Moppit]

The last guy I dated was not cut and he had problems. When he had an erection and the skin pulled back it was very painful and sometimes too sensitive for me to even touch him. No matter how much he washed that area there was always a smell that lingered.

This is just my personal two cents but I find that an uncut penis is downright ugly.

The guy I'm with now is cut and there is no lingering smell and no other problems. Just my preference.

My son was circumsized at birth and at age 2 he had to have surgery for a hernia and inborn hydrocele and he was recircumsized because the surgeon thought not enough skin was removed the first time. I wonder what he will think when I tell him that?