An article published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine provides more information about the potential role of male circumcision in the global control of sexually transmitted diseases. More than 5,000 uncircumcised men in Uganda were enrolled to study the effectiveness of circumcision in reducing transmission of genital herpes (HSV-2) and the genital wart virus (HPV, or human papilloma virus).
The results? Circumcision reduced the risk of acquiring herpes by 25% and of acquiring the genital wart virus (HPV) by 35% (there was no reduction in the transmission of syphilis). Three previous studies have also demonstrated that male circumcision also reduces the risk of HIV acquisition by 50 to 60%.
These three sexually transmitted diseases, HIV, HPV, and HSV, are significant health problems everywhere in the world, including the United States. HPV causes genital warts, cervical cancer, and anal cancer. Herpes infections are painful, increase the risk of acquiring HIV, and for the almost 3,000 babies born to a mother during a herpes outbreak this virus can cause serious health problems or even be fatal.
Circumcision may have more of a health impact in countries with the highest incidence of HIV; however, the benefits should be considered for all men. The commentary accompanying the article pointed out in the United States male circumcision is lowest among African-American and Hispanic men, groups with disproportionately higher rates of HIV, herpes, and cervical cancer. Medicaid also does not pay for routine male circumcision in 16 states, limiting the ability of economically disadvantaged families to even consider circumcision at birth.
The decision to be circumcised, as with any health care decision, is personal. But it is important to remember preventing the spread of viral sexually transmitted diseases is difficult, and while condoms help they are not 100% effective. HIV, herpes, and HPV are health epidemics and the effect of circumcision in reducing these infections should be weighed by every family considering circumcision for their newborn.
For more info: www.cdc.gov/STD/
Remember, the information in this column does not constitute individual medical advice .jpg)
Comments
I think the story here is that some US medical professionals are so obsessed with trying to find a purpose for circumcision that they are fudging data and overestimating insignificant facts. This particular study was partially funded by our tax dollars and by Bill and Malinda Gates. Odd that this 20 -30 % change of risk, where cut men used condoms more and cut men certainly did not have sex some of the time is considered at all. In another Gates funded study HIV positive men and their wives showed CIRCUMCISED men were passing HIV to women at a higher rate. But that study was a dead end so they don’t talk about it. The end of course is to promote circumcision. In particular it is to widen the base in the USA. The US, due to the internet was slowly realizing that not only does circ not make you healthy, it can cause all sorts of problems. People also realized (and in the pre-internet days natural men did not talk about it) that circ removes about 20,000 fine touch nerve endings and the most sensitive part of the male genitals. It is like losing your lips or your fingertips. You may ask why do these people push this barbaric ritual as a health practice?
If you had advocated something, and done something to thousands and it was revealed as bad, it is a natural reaction to defend it. This also applies to men that have been cut. NO man wants to hear that there member somehow has a problem. This also applies to mothers that had their son cut. There is this huge body of resistance to natural in the US. People must recognize the obsession of the medical people. None of this data, if it was not cooked up (and it is at least indefinite as condoms, behavior, sex - they did not know everything) is worth ripping and chopping off a baby boys most sensitive part in a developed country that has good water.
Someone said this obsession and this push for mutilation is hate or anti male sexuality, I think it based on embarrassment and an obsession with trying to find a reason to do this amputation. Let us Americans at least ask the American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Neonatal [male] Circumcision when they review the policy on circ to have at least one natural male doctor (Someone that knows first hand the joy of these body parts that are amputated) included in the review as well as at least some consideration for the function and make up (thousands of fine touch nerve endings) of these parts. That would be the minimum.
The real story is the obsession (as a UK med said on this story) of American circumcisers trying to keep the practice going in the USA. You see they have skin in this and they want the practice to continue, as otherwise they would be shown to be heinous genital mutilators.
Based on new university research, a non-prescription gel or cream containing the safe and natural chemical GML could be on the market immediately, saving lives from deadly HIV/AIDS (gmlcream.com, gmlgel.com). GML (glycerol monolaurate) exists naturally in humans and is safely used in ice cream and cosmetics. It has been shown to protect monkeys from the HIV virus; researchers expect the same protection will be available to humans. The gel or cream would be applied in the vagina, creating a protective barrier against the virus during sexual intercourse. A dose of GML, based on the new research, will cost less than a penny.
With the American medical community, it seems to be "first, do no harm", unless it pertains to circumcision. There is a deliberate war of misinformation going on here. Please notice that there are always a lot of disclaimer words in these studies of circumcision. For instance, "circumcision could help protect their sons", "It's not clear why circumcision may affect infection rates.", "When the foreskin is removed, the skin covering the head of the penis becomes tougher. That may protect against "microtears" during sex that can provide a point of entry for germs."
"The mucosal lining of the foreskin may allow germs to penetrate to underlying skin cells." "After sex, the foreskin may prolong the time that tender skin is exposed to germs."
If this is scientific, why don't they know? Why is it full of conjecture? This is like they way the cereal companies market sugary cereals..."may be part of a nutritious breakfast"
When someone is telling me to remove the two most erotic parts of me, for some projected health measure that is not effective without condoms, I would rather be truly sure. Sometimes, the medical community will go to really ridiculous ends to justify genital amputation on males only, but not on females.
Why is this? Females contain the same mucous membranes. If these viruses can enter through the male foreskin, they can enter through the female foreskin. Why not circumcise our daughters as well? Because this is a propaganda thing. The mindset of many Americans is that circumcision is good, and any justification smooths out the rough edges of our consciences.
It is unethical to remove healthy body parts from a non-consenting person, period. If they have to use a condom to really protect, then it is not only unethical, it is useless, and harmful.
A first New Zealand study found differences between of STI between circumcised and intact men a second much larger study found STI with the split 23.4% circ and 23.5% “uncircumcised”. If you look on the web the second big real study got little press. This Uganda study with the low % difference is all over the media. The 30% or whatever is from about 10% risk to about 8% risk. A recent US cohort study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases showed only the total number of lifetime sexual partners affected the risk of new (incident) HPV infections and there was no difference in the risk of new (incident) HPV between circumcised and natural men.
In May of 2008 a medical survey showed Uncircumcised (natural) Fared Better as Circumcision appeared to have an effect on rates of genital warts:
* 4 ½% of circumcised men reported having genital warts
* 2.4% of uncircumcised men reported having genital warts-- again in the US.
How do they make such a big deal out of the Uganda Study? Don’t we have data that shows ripping and cutting baby genitals doesn't avoid new HPV infections! Doesn’t the mostly cut USA have quite a bot of HPV?
Good stuff Edward, I hope that gets deployed.
What do you know about the male foreskin (prepuce) and how it feels for a man??? You are a woman and you probably never even studied the complexity of the highly erogenous foreskin and its function. What about cutting off your clit? No medical society in the whole world recommends infant circumcision. The 14th amendment of the American Constitution guaranties equal protection under law for all genders which makes male genital mutilation just as illegal as female genital cutting. You either stop your child mutilating despicable crime instantly or you will be recorded as perpetrator. Your parent deceiving lies about the so called health benefits have been debunked by real doctors. Everything you said will be saved as evidence for the day when you will be brought to justice. How sick and deranged one must be to be able to stick knives into helpless crying baby boys' penises. We are uniting world wide to bring an end to this disgusting sex crime you circers perform on children!
So it's ethic be damned. Consent can not be given when no knowledge of the foreskin is communicated especially the 75% of the sexual receptors that are cut off. Would you still be spouting cutting remarks if the tables were reversed to promote female genital cutting. There are preliminary studies showing equal results for female circumcision to protect against HIV. As both genders have the skin what are we talking about? Is it belief of Jews that males are born needing circumcision but females are not being born perfect? Just Asking!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!