Circumcision Could Prevent HPV

[Negin]

Known this for years, but thought to share for anyone who's interested.

[Laura Corin]

So, one relies on circumcision to reduce the likelihood of HPV transmission by 28% (not 'prevent' it), but unprotected sex still leaves one open to HIV and other serious disease. Why not just wear a condom and reduce the likelihood of all of them?

 

I needed surgery for cervical dysplasia, probably caused by HPV. I would still not circumcise my sons without a better reason.

 

Laura

[SquirrellyMama]

So, one relies on circumcision to reduce the likelihood of HPV transmission by 28% (not 'prevent' it), but unprotected sex still leaves one open to HIV and other serious disease. Why not just wear a condom and reduce the likelihood of all of them?

 

I needed surgery for cervical dysplasia, probably caused by HPV. I would still not circumcise my sons without a better reason.

 

Laura

 

:iagree:

[Guest]

So, one relies on circumcision to reduce the likelihood of HPV transmission by 28% (not 'prevent' it), but unprotected sex still leaves one open to HIV and other serious disease. Why not just wear a condom and reduce the likelihood of all of them?

 

I needed surgery for cervical dysplasia, probably caused by HPV. I would still not circumcise my sons without a better reason.

 

Laura

 

Actually condoms do not always protect against HPV, however I would hesitate to take any kind of study published by the Lancet too seriously at this point anyway ;).

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20027552-10391704.html

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-06/lancet-study-tying-childhood-vaccine-to-autism-was-a-fraud-report-says.html

[Laura Corin]

Actually condoms do not always protect against HPV, however I would hesitate to take any kind of study published by the Lancet too seriously at this point anyway ;).

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20027552-10391704.html

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-06/lancet-study-tying-childhood-vaccine-to-autism-was-a-fraud-report-says.html

 

That's why I didn't say the condoms would prevent HPV, just as circumcision does not prevent HPV: both just reduce the likelihood of transmission.

 

The Lancet is a highly reputable publication which made one mistake: it has worked very hard to remedy the error.

 

Laura

[Guest]

The Lancet is a highly reputable publication which made one mistake: it has worked very hard to remedy the error.

 

Laura

 

After the panic it caused I still would hesitate to take what they publish as a given. In our house we are very familiar with the Lancet. I did not say I would not consider what they publish (if it were something important to me), I would however research it heavily or I would let time prove its accuracy.

[5forMe]

Still not a valid reason for circumcision, IMO.

[Guest]

Still not a valid reason for circumcision, IMO.

 

When I said I would research I was referring to possible other studies they may publish that may interest me or be important to me for some reason. In this particular situation and with this particular study I definitely agree with you :iagree:.

[nansk]

This thread does not belong in the K-8 Curriculum Board.

[AnnaM]

Im sure not being promiscuous could lower the rate as much and keeping it for marriage even more. Not a reason to cut off a part of my son's boy parts.

 

I agree though this doesnt belong here.

[mommaduck]

Im sure not being promiscuous could lower the rate as much and keeping it for marriage even more. Not a reason to cut off a part of my son's boy parts.

 

I agree though this doesnt belong here.

:iagree:

[mcconnellboys]

Yeah, this is nothing new. There were studies done years and years ago that showed that circumcision aids the health of both sexual partners as well as the individual. I've been blasted many, many times for suggesting this in the last ten years, however, as the "no circumcision" debate has raged.....

[mcconnellboys]

You are correct about lower number of sexual partners providing less exposure for things like HIV and HPV. However, older studies that were done showed that circumcision also lowered incidence of cervical and other cancers in partners and provided other health benefits.

[Snowfall]

Yeah, this is nothing new. There were studies done years and years ago that showed that circumcision aids the health of both sexual partners as well as the individual. I've been blasted many, many times for suggesting this in the last ten years, however, as the "no circumcision" debate has raged.....

 

Do they experience a lot more cancers and fewer "health benefits" in developed countries with much lower circumcision rates? If not, I would suggest we're barking up the wrong tree and need to look elsewhere for these benefits.

 

Edited: Here's a letter from the ACS to the AAP from '96. Have they changed their position on the soundness of the studies you are referring to - the ones done "years and years ago"?

 

As representatives of the American Cancer Society, we would like to discourage the American Academy of Pediatrics from promoting routine circumcision as a preventive measure for penile or cervical cancer. The American Cancer Society does not consider routine circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent such cancers.

 

 

Research suggesting a pattern in the circumcision status of partners of women with cervical cancer is methodologically flawed, outdated, and has not been taken seriously in the medical community for decades.

 

 

(...)

 

 

Penile cancer rates in countries which do not practice circumcision are lower than those found in the United States. Fatalities caused by circumcision accidents may approximate the mortality rate from penile cancer.

 

 

(emphasis mine)

Edited January 8, 2011 by Snowfall

[Tarreymere]

Female circumcision will prevent a number of STDs as well as decrease the incidence of UTIs in women. I doubt that will motivate anyone to have their daughter's inner and outer labia removed surgically, so why do people still think that disease prevention should inspire people to have their sons circumcised? Heck, removing women's breasts will probably prevent most breast cancer but I'm still not going to consider it.

[kokotg]

Or routine appendectomies for, say, all 4 or 5 year olds. That would save nearly 400 lives a year in the US, no one (at least in industrialized countries) needs an appendix anyway, and the complication rate is about the same as for circumcisions (or much lower, depending on where you get your stats).

[mcconnellboys]

I don't have a dog in this hunt. I care not a whit whether every male on the planet is uncircumcised. I'm simply stating what I've read over and over again throughout the years. And the AAP flipflops every few years, depending upon how the wind blows....

 

Yes, studies continue to be done that show that there are benefits of male circumcision (I've never seen a single one regarding female circumcision, as someone else mentioned). They are long-term and obviously info is going to change from year to year.... Johns Hopkins is involved in one that I've followed over time and I have respect for their work.

 

There are articles all over the web about it if you care to do a search.

 

Here's one:

 

http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2006/13feb06/13hiv.html

 

Benefits to women shown in this study were challenged, but the benefits to the men, themselves, held so far as I know:

 

http://www.natap.org/2008/CROI/croi_04.htm

 

Here's a CNN article about the study from 2009:

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/03/26/healthmag.circumcision.hpv.herpes/index.html

 

And here's another article about it from 2010 that lists further health benefit findings:

 

http://www.physorg.com/news181982161.html

 

 

As with all science, this is going to continue to change as new findings are made and as the population is followed over time....

Edited January 9, 2011 by mcconnellboys

[mommaduck]

And yet, when my oldest was born, the doctors were trying to convince me that studies showed that NOT circing them reduced his risk of STD's and AIDs in the future.

[mcconnellboys]

I know, the Academy flip-flops every few years....

[lamamaloca]

Yes, studies continue to be done that show that there are benefits of male circumcision (I've never seen a single one regarding female circumcision, as someone else mentioned).

 

There actually have been a couple studies with female "circumcision" that suggest a lower risk of HIV transmission, but since no medical group would consider promoting this mutilation, it hasn't been thoroughly investigated and there certainly haven't been the RCTs that there have been for male circumcision. There is some information associating FGC with higher rates of HIV, especially in virgin, but that association also exists for boys were are circumcised in traditional ceremonies. No matter true association, though, FGC will never be investigated as a way to lower the risk of HIV as it is accepted as an a priori wrong to mutilate the genitals of girls and women. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting#HIV

 

There are benefits to male circumcision, but benefits that can be duplicated through lifestyle. If my son wants to be circed as an adult, that will be his decision and his choice.

[parias1126]

This thread does not belong in the K-8 Curriculum Board.

 

I was starting to wonder what board I was on.

[Negin]

This thread does not belong in the K-8 Curriculum Board.

 

Sorry about that. I only just realized this. I wish it would be moved by the moderators, or, better yet, close it down or remove it altogether.

Edited January 9, 2011 by Negin in Grenada

[Guest]

Sorry about that. I only just realized this. I wish it would be moved by the moderators, or, better yet, close it down or remove it altogether.

 

Hey... psst... no worries :)! I'm sure many of us have made that mistake before. I know I have made similar posting mistakes ;).

 

 

:leaving:

[Plucky]

Still not a valid reason for circumcision, IMO.

 

:iagree:

[bettyandbob]

Circumcision has been shown to reduce transmission of most STDs including HIV. Additionally, boys who are circumcised are less likely to get urinary tract infections. Having seen what a close friend went through with both her boys getting multiple infections, even with proper hygiene and my own son who having severe sensory issues which would have made proper hygiene very difficult, I'm glad I had my ds circumcised. I really didn't know my ds would have all the problems he has at the time I made the decision. I won't be with my son when "opportunities arise" to practice abstinence.

 

This is really a family decision. It seems to me that arguments fall on both sides and every parent tries to sort out the best answer for themselves. It is good to see all the research on the issue to make the decision.

[JeneralMom]

Female circumcision will prevent a number of STDs as well as decrease the incidence of UTIs in women. I doubt that will motivate anyone to have their daughter's inner and outer labia removed surgically, so why do people still think that disease prevention should inspire people to have their sons circumcised? Heck, removing women's breasts will probably prevent most breast cancer but I'm still not going to consider it.

 

Precisely, bravo!

[AnnaM]

Circumcision has been shown to reduce transmission of most STDs including HIV. Additionally, boys who are circumcised are less likely to get urinary tract infections. Having seen what a close friend went through with both her boys getting multiple infections, even with proper hygiene and my own son who having severe sensory issues which would have made proper hygiene very difficult, I'm glad I had my ds circumcised. I really didn't know my ds would have all the problems he has at the time I made the decision. I won't be with my son when "opportunities arise" to practice abstinence.

 

This is really a family decision. It seems to me that arguments fall on both sides and every parent tries to sort out the best answer for themselves. It is good to see all the research on the issue to make the decision.

 

I would like to know why no one is acknowledging the fact that the US is the ONLY "developed" country that practices circing as routine. My DH is British and circing was not even an option for us. In the UK it is done only out of medical necessity. Why are we the only country that cuts off part of a baby's body in order to pre-emptively treat something they MIGHT get, and at that, more often than not, they get from acting irresponsibly. Problems in uncirc'ed boys are actually very rare and USUALLY come from poor hygeine or sexual irresponsibility. I asked my husband if he knew of anyone who had ever had their penis get infected and neither him, nor his family, including my SIL who is a nurse, had ever heard of , met or otherwise known of anyone who had.

 

Sorry for spelling errors passion and a bad cold are both to blame!

[dirty ethel rackham]

Well, in a country where most adult men are circumcised, it has done nothing to stop the spread of HPV ... so, the minuscule drop in transmission rates do not justify the practice of circumcision. Any contact with lesions anywhere can cause transmission, and since lesions are not limited to the p#nis and vag*na, the foreskin plays only a small role in transmission.

[KatieH]

I'm so happy to see so many passionate women speaking out against circumcision. Seriously, making me cry here! I live in an area with very high circ rates, and it's really disheartening sometimes.

 

BTW, I got HPV from a CIRCUMCISED man. The cervical cancer kind. I had to have a chunk of my cervix cut out. Still won't let a scalpel anywhere near my sweet boy's foreskin.

[Nakia]

Female circumcision will prevent a number of STDs as well as decrease the incidence of UTIs in women. I doubt that will motivate anyone to have their daughter's inner and outer labia removed surgically, so why do people still think that disease prevention should inspire people to have their sons circumcised? Heck, removing women's breasts will probably prevent most breast cancer but I'm still not going to consider it.

 

:iagree: I would rep you if I could.

 

I am a nurse on a postpartum unit, and thankfully, fewer and fewer people are circumcising their baby boys. A lot of that has to do with the fact that Medicaid doesn't pay for circumcisions anymore in NC, but it's also because more and more people are learning it is not necessary.

Edited January 9, 2011 by Nakia

[KatieH]

 

I am a nurse on a postpartum unit, and thankfully, fewer and fewer people are circumcising their baby boys. A lot of that has to do with the fact that Medicaid doesn't pay for circumcisions anymore, but it's also because more and more people are learning it is not necessary.

 

Sadly, that's not true in every state :( Indiana medicaid still covers it. I think it's only about 19 states that no longer cover RIC.

[Nakia]

Sadly, that's not true in every state :( Indiana medicaid still covers it. I think it's only about 19 states that no longer cover RIC.

 

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I live in NC.

[AmyinMD]

I thought there was a vaccine for HPV. I have kind of mixed feelings about that one so I've not gotten it for any of my girls. If one is that concerned about HPV I would think a vaccine would be preferable to surgery.

 

Neither of my boys are circed and that article doesn't make me regret not doing it. I figure if they want it done they can have it done themselves when they are older. I think they should make their own decision about their bodies.

[mommaduck]

I thought there was a vaccine for HPV. I have kind of mixed feelings about that one so I've not gotten it for any of my girls. If one is that concerned about HPV I would think a vaccine would be preferable to surgery.

 

Neither of my boys are circed and that article doesn't make me regret not doing it. I figure if they want it done they can have it done themselves when they are older. I think they should make their own decision about their bodies.

Girls have been damaged and even died from that vaccine. It also only targets certain strains of HPV. No thank you.

[Carrie12345]

I have a high-risk strain of HPV (from a circ'ed male). My youngest sons are not circ'ed and my dds will not be getting the vaccine. It doesn't make sense (imo) for me to make such enormous decisions on their behalf when they will have the chance to make much simpler and more effective choices for themselves.

[LibraryLover]

Great! I'll cut off my feet so has not to get plantar warts! :) J/k! lol

Edited January 10, 2011 by LibraryLover

[LaissezFaire]

Female circumcision will prevent a number of STDs as well as decrease the incidence of UTIs in women. I doubt that will motivate anyone to have their daughter's inner and outer labia removed surgically, so why do people still think that disease prevention should inspire people to have their sons circumcised? Heck, removing women's breasts will probably prevent most breast cancer but I'm still not going to consider it.

:iagree: Exactly.

[Spy Car]

Circumcision is better on every front. Less risk of disease, and more hygienic.

 

Bill

[FaithManor]

Hi Spycar,

 

Good to see you around! Haven't heard from you in a while....you do know you are going to be massively flamed for your post, don't you??? Please tell me that you have your fire retardent gear on, and a hose ready just in case. LOL

 

Faith, who has feelings on the subject but will not share them having seen some absolutely, mythologically large, epic, pro/anti circumcision threads over the years.

[Mejane]

 

I am a nurse on a postpartum unit, and thankfully, fewer and fewer people are circumcising their baby boys. A lot of that has to do with the fact that Medicaid doesn't pay for circumcisions anymore in NC, but it's also because more and more people are learning it is not necessary.

 

I'm very glad to hear that, Nakia. I think it's an archaic practice, although I respect the religious aspect of it.

[Mejane]

.

Edited January 10, 2011 by Mejane
double post

[LibraryLover]

Circumcision is better on every front. Less risk of disease, and more hygienic.

 

Bill

 

 

Bill is cir'd! :)

 

It's hard to think something else might be ok as well.

 

 

LL, who is not, will not, get into the various and superior pros of the other ok. :)

Edited January 10, 2011 by LibraryLover

[Snowfall]

Circumcision is better on every front.

(emphasis added)

 

I disagree. ;):lol:

 

Edited...don't want to get into any trouble...I really like your posts, though, even if I know you're wrong on this one. :)

Edited January 10, 2011 by Snowfall

[SonshineLearner]

Definitely not better on "every front", but I wouldn't expect you to know that. (In fact, I would expect you not to.) ;):lol:

 

You're too funny :) We all know that Bill is all for circ'ing. Gosh, spots like France must be just overwhelmed with problems.

[Mrs Mungo]

I am on my phone. Can you all just search all of the circumcision posts under my name? ;)

[Snowfall]

You're too funny :) We all know that Bill is all for circ'ing. Gosh, spots like France must be just overwhelmed with problems.

 

LOL! I edited when you were posting because I was afraid someone might think what I said was inappropriate, but really I don't know that it matters how I say it. I just think we can't make sweeping generalizations about the whole nature of "everything". heheh

[LibraryLover]

You're too funny :) We all know that Bill is all for circ'ing. Gosh, spots like France must be just overwhelmed with problems.

 

 

 

LOL

 

Or so totally not.

[Mommee & Baba]

This decision is a personal & religious one for the family to make. Same for breastfeeding or formula. Same for cloth diapers or paper diapers. Same goes for family bed or baby crib. Same goes for homeschooling or public school. Same goes for working mom or staying home mom. Same goes for vaccinations or no vaccinations.

 

I gave up on trying to point out studies and ect on particular subjects because in the end feelings get hurt.

[Negin]

No time to read all the replies, or any of them yet.

I have to ask the moderators to possibly close this thread. I regret ever having started it. I forgot that it would be controversial. :confused:

[LidiyaDawn]

This decision is a personal & religious one for the family to make. Same for breastfeeding or formula. Same for cloth diapers or paper diapers. Same goes for family bed or baby crib. Same goes for homeschooling or public school. Same goes for working mom or staying home mom. Same goes for vaccinations or no vaccinations.

 

 

:iagree:

 

I don't know why people fight about all these things...why not just do what's right for your family and let others do what's right for theirs? :)