Saille Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Circumcision is better on every front. Less risk of disease, and more hygienic. Bill I always find the hygiene argument sort of funny. I mean, you do what you need to to keep things clean, you know? It's only less hygienic if you *don't* clean it properly, but certainly you *can*...it isn't...ahem...rocket science. And I say this as someone surrounded by uncirc'ed males. Which is a disturbing image, I guess, but you know what I mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnaM Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 :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? :) I just don't put circ'ing and cding in the same category. One is cutting off a part of a baby and the other is, well, not. Same with breastfeeding. My personal oppinion is that formula ought to be reserved for only those who actually NEED it, but even that is not the same as cutting off part of a boy's private...This isn't a reversable event, and shouldn't be done routinely. Period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimm Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I think if I were a young boy, I'd feel weird that my mom was on the internet arguing about penises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) I think if I were a young boy, I'd feel weird that my mom was on the internet arguing about penises. My oldest knows I get on the internet and argue about penises. He supports the argument ;) He had a "botched" circ (aka "partial" without our permission) and it caused all kinds of infections when he was young. If he had either been fully circ'd or left completely alone, he would have been fine. He's partially circ'd, ds2 is fully circ'd, ds3 is intact. So we have been on both sides of the issue. My kids have also watched an RIC video online. That made a pretty big impact on them. I tell them that they don't have to agree with me (heavens, I don't even agree with the *me* of 15yrs ago). But I do expect them to do their own reading and make their own decisions based on reasoning than to just choose a side because this or that person said so (including me). Edited January 10, 2011 by mommaduck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnaM Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I think if I were a young boy, I'd feel weird that my mom was on the internet arguing about penises. Maybe, but when I was an adult and had more understanding, I would be greatful that my mother cared enough to bother :) I know many mothers who wish that they had seen both sides before they made the choice. Maybe they would have had their son's circ'ed anyways, but at least then they would have been informed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 yes, there are some benefits. But at what cost??? The amputation of a fully functional body part????? Not to mention that as many kids DIED from circumcision complications as SIDS last year. Add in the risks of adhesions and other complications and the minor benefits are not worth it. 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.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 :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? :) By that argument female genital mutilation should also be allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Girls have been damaged and even died from that vaccine. It also only targets certain strains of HPV. No thank you. And many many boys have died from complications from circumcision. Last year it was about the same number that died from SIDS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 And many many boys have died from complications from circumcision. Last year it was about the same number that died from SIDS. :confused: Why is this directed at me? I'm not one that's supporting circ. I don't support circ or Gardisil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 :confused: Why is this directed at me? I'm not one that's supporting circ. I don't support circ or Gardisil. Sorry, I was just adding in to the information that Gardisil has risks. In other words, Gardisil has risks, circumcision has risks. Just wanted to put that out there, and your post made the connection easy. Sorry to implicate you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakia Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 yes, there are some benefits. But at what cost??? The amputation of a fully functional body part????? Not to mention that as many kids DIED from circumcision complications as SIDS last year. Add in the risks of adhesions and other complications and the minor benefits are not worth it. Re: the bolded part. I had no idea. That is revolting. Can you link that? I would love to read it. Just another reason against circs. I detest them. I actually signed a conflict of interest form at the hospital so that I NEVER have to set foot in the circ room. That was the only way I would take the job on the postpartum floor. I am not posting this to add flame to the fire, but I saw a bad bad circ last year. I didn't witness the actual circ, but had to perform dressing changes on what was quite possibly the most horrific thing I have ever seen in my 15 year nursing career. It was so awful that if I hadn't already been opposed, I would have been after that. I cried when I saw it. The poor mom was young, and the docs told her that her baby would have absolutely no lasting problems. I called BS on that. A huge chunk of his penile skin was missing. Not just foreskin, but all the way past the glans in a triangle shaped incision. Apparently the equipment failed. The docs didn't even bother to call in a urologist or a plastic surgeon, which I advised the mother to insist on. :crying: I know people say circs are absolutely safe, but there can be very serious complications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Sorry, I was just adding in to the information that Gardisil has risks. In other words, Gardisil has risks, circumcision has risks. Just wanted to put that out there, and your post made the connection easy. Sorry to implicate you! Ah, got it. Yes, they both have risks and the risk/benefit doesn't bring me to support either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Re: the bolded part. I had no idea. That is revolting. Can you link that? I would love to read it. Just another reason against circs. I detest them. I actually signed a conflict of interest form at the hospital so that I NEVER have to set foot in the circ room. That was the only way I would take the job on the postpartum floor. I am not posting this to add flame to the fire, but I saw a bad bad circ last year. I didn't witness the actual circ, but had to perform dressing changes on what was quite possibly the most horrific thing I have ever seen in my 15 year nursing career. It was so awful that if I hadn't already been opposed, I would have been after that. I cried when I saw it. The poor mom was young, and the docs told her that her baby would have absolutely no lasting problems. I called BS on that. A huge chunk of his penile skin was missing. Not just foreskin, but all the way past the glans in a triangle shaped incision. Apparently the equipment failed. The docs didn't even bother to call in a urologist or a plastic surgeon, which I advised the mother to insist on. :crying: I know people say circs are absolutely safe, but there can be very serious complications. Oh my! Poor baby! :crying: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonshineLearner Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 ......A huge chunk of his penile skin was missing. Not just foreskin, but all the way past the glans in a triangle shaped incision. Apparently the equipment failed. The docs didn't even bother to call in a urologist or a plastic surgeon, which I advised the mother to insist on. :crying: I know people say circs are absolutely safe, but there can be very serious complications. Nakia, What type of circ instrument was used? Was it "free hand"... don't know what that's called... I would ONLY do circ'ing if I was religiously held to it... and I would have it done a certain way..... etc.. One thing, while learning about whether I wanted to have it done to my son... that I learned... was that there are actually "different lengths" of circing.... SO... you can get a short circ.. or a long one... for lack of better terms... (I researched this a long time ago..) BUT, I've never heard a DR that asked for the Parent's preference. You'd think that would be a parent's choice, and not the Dr's. I'm actually not AS opposed to the actual circ'ing... as to the ripping the foreskin from the p*nis to be able to cut it off.... and the amount that they cut off.... I think that whether you're talking about a medical procedure like... abortion... or circ'ing (really I'm NOT equating the two!!) You should have to watch it... kinda like a disclaimer... before you have one done on your children. I don't know that people would carry through on either of them... if they watched one, first... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnaM Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Some information on death related to circ'ing. It is rare for a child to die, but if the procedure is unecessary, unrecommended and potentially unsafe, why on earth would anyone do it?! http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/pdf/specialstatement.pdf http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/unnecessary.html http://www.noharmm.org/incidenceUS.htm Wiki which is pretty unreliable but I will post it anyways puts death rates at 9 in 100,000. Another site says 1.3% result in death http://www.circumstitions.com/death.html THYMOS: Journal of Boyhood Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1, Spring 2010, 78-90 LOST BOYS: AN ESTIMATE OF U.S. CIRCUMCISION-RELATED INFANT DEATHS - Dan Bollinger Abstract: Baby boys can and do succumb as a result of having their foreskin removed. Circumcision-related mortality rates are not known with certainty; this study estimates the scale of this problem. This study finds that approximately 117 neonatal circumcision-related deaths (9.01/100,000) occur annually in the United States, about 1.3% of male neonatal deaths from all causes. Because infant circumcision is elective, all of these deaths are avoidable. I couldnt image risking my child on something like this, and I couldnt imagine living with the guilt of it if something did happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Re: the bolded part. I had no idea. That is revolting. Can you link that? I would love to read it. Just another reason against circs. I detest them. I actually signed a conflict of interest form at the hospital so that I NEVER have to set foot in the circ room. That was the only way I would take the job on the postpartum floor. I am not posting this to add flame to the fire, but I saw a bad bad circ last year. I didn't witness the actual circ, but had to perform dressing changes on what was quite possibly the most horrific thing I have ever seen in my 15 year nursing career. It was so awful that if I hadn't already been opposed, I would have been after that. I cried when I saw it. The poor mom was young, and the docs told her that her baby would have absolutely no lasting problems. I called BS on that. A huge chunk of his penile skin was missing. Not just foreskin, but all the way past the glans in a triangle shaped incision. Apparently the equipment failed. The docs didn't even bother to call in a urologist or a plastic surgeon, which I advised the mother to insist on. :crying: I know people say circs are absolutely safe, but there can be very serious complications. http://www.examiner.com/family-health-in-washington-dc/new-study-estimates-neonatal-circumcision-death-rate-higher-than-suffocation-and-auto-accidents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Not to mention that as many kids DIED from circumcision complications as SIDS last year. This is an outrageous untruth deliberately spread by anti-circ websites. The death-rate from circumcisions in the US is 1 in 500,000. It is troubling that this discussion is not conducted in an atmosphere honestly. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycalling Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 After 6 intact infant sons and 1 intact infant daughter to clean...I've decided all future daughters will be circ'ed. I feel I should have the right to do that as I'm the one who has to clean my babies and later teach them to bathe well. She also complains about having to clean herself and does a poor job (she's 5) so I'm sure she would have been much happier had we had this done to her as an infant. While we're at it, I think she would be better off getting a double masectomy as her breasts start to grow. Her maternal grandmother had breast cancer, so I think it's in her best interest and it should be my decision. :leaving: (*Sarcasm*...as someone will inevitable believe me.) 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: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This is an outrageous untruth deliberately spread by anti-circ websites. The death-rate from circumcisions in the US is 1 in 500,000. It is troubling that this discussion is not conducted in an atmosphere honestly. Bill I did not get the statistic from an anti circ website. It was in the mainstream media a while back. The study was published in Thymo, which is peer reviewed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ondreeuh Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 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. Regarding "proper hygiene," it is a common misunderstanding that properly caring for an intact penis requires retraction of the foreskin from infancy. My pediatrician (practicing over 30 years) even told me to retract my infant son's foreskin and tried to demonstrate until I stopped her! This is the WRONG way to care for an intact penis. The foreskin is naturally attached to the glans and should remain there. Tugging on it to pull it back actually rips apart the layers of tissue, which causes wounds that are prone to infection. It also causes adhesions which are then later blamed for a "necessary" circ. I would not be at ALL surprised if your friend had followed advice from her doctor and/or friends and thought she had to retract her son's penises and thoroughly wash her son's penises, which then led to infections. If you leave it alone it is quite good at staying healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Regarding "proper hygiene," it is a common misunderstanding that properly caring for an intact penis requires retraction of the foreskin from infancy. My pediatrician (practicing over 30 years) even told me to retract my infant son's foreskin and tried to demonstrate until I stopped her! This is the WRONG way to care for an intact penis. The foreskin is naturally attached to the glans and should remain there. Tugging on it to pull it back actually rips apart the layers of tissue, which causes wounds that are prone to infection. It also causes adhesions which are then later blamed for a "necessary" circ. I would not be at ALL surprised if your friend had followed advice from her doctor and/or friends and thought she had to retract her son's penises and thoroughly wash her son's penises, which then led to infections. If you leave it alone it is quite good at staying healthy. Yep. The problem is that as we've become such a society accustomed to RIC, we don't know about proper care for the intact...even physicians aren't informed and "guess" or assume that you should retract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnaM Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This is an outrageous untruth deliberately spread by anti-circ websites. The death-rate from circumcisions in the US is 1 in 500,000. It is troubling that this discussion is not conducted in an atmosphere honestly. Bill I quoted all of my sources of information as well as posted several so as to not be quoting all of the same source. You on the other hand have offered no sources for your information. I would be interested in seeing them if you have them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnaM Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yep. The problem is that as we've become such a society accustomed to RIC, we don't know about proper care for the intact...even physicians aren't informed and "guess" or assume that you should retract. I have had a nurse suggest that I pull back the foreskin and nearly did it herself. She was suprised when I replied in shock and shouted "NO!" at her as she was about to do it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakia Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Nakia, What type of circ instrument was used? Was it "free hand"... don't know what that's called... I would ONLY do circ'ing if I was religiously held to it... and I would have it done a certain way..... etc.. One thing, while learning about whether I wanted to have it done to my son... that I learned... was that there are actually "different lengths" of circing.... SO... you can get a short circ.. or a long one... for lack of better terms... (I researched this a long time ago..) BUT, I've never heard a DR that asked for the Parent's preference. You'd think that would be a parent's choice, and not the Dr's. I'm actually not AS opposed to the actual circ'ing... as to the ripping the foreskin from the p*nis to be able to cut it off.... and the amount that they cut off.... I think that whether you're talking about a medical procedure like... abortion... or circ'ing (really I'm NOT equating the two!!) You should have to watch it... kinda like a disclaimer... before you have one done on your children. I don't know that people would carry through on either of them... if they watched one, first... They used a Gomco circ clamp. Apparently it slipped during the procedure, and the doctor didn't notice and kept cutting. :svengo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom-ninja. Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Let's just say that all the women I know who have HPV have only been with circ'd men. 'Nuff said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 You should have to watch it... kinda like a disclaimer... before you have one done on your children. I don't know that people would carry through on either of them... if they watched one, first... I was there for my son's circumcision. With a topical anesthetic, followed by a local anesthetic, it was a completely non-traumatic non-event. My child did not wince, much less cry. It is a very humane procedure that brings a life-time of benefits. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I was there for my son's circumcision. With a topical anesthetic, followed by a local anesthetic, it was a completely non-traumatic non-event. My child did not wince, much less cry. It is a very humane procedure that brings a life-time of benefits. Bill It isn't about the pain, although that is an issue as MOST doctors do NOT use proper anestetic. The cream takes at least 30 minutes to work and most doctors won't wait that long before starting. However, even if there is no pain then or after as it heals, it is still amputating a functional part of the anatomy on the off chance it might possibly prevent a disease. Diseases that can be better prevented with alternative strategies that don't require amputation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) I did not get the statistic from an anti circ website. It was in the mainstream media a while back. The study was published in Thymo, which is peer reviewed. Bolinger's "Lost Boys" so-called "study" has been throughly discredited as to methodology and findings by the medical establishment. Yet, anticircers continue to trot it of as "evidence" despite the fact that the "study" has no merit and is contradicted by numerous other studies. The King study in NY found no deaths in 500,000 cases. The Army study found 0 deaths in 300,000 cases. It is just like the phony "autism is caused by vaccines" madness that is perpetuated on the Internet. It is just not factual. Bill Edited January 10, 2011 by Spy Car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 It isn't about the pain, although that is an issue as MOST doctors do NOT use proper anestetic. The cream takes at least 30 minutes to work and most doctors won't wait that long before starting. However, even if there is no pain then or after as it heals, it is still amputating a functional part of the anatomy on the off chance it might possibly prevent a disease. Diseases that can be better prevented with alternative strategies that don't require amputation. Our doctor used a topical cream. Waited. Then used a series of small injections of a local. Since every medical finding shows circumcision is superior for resisting the contraction of multiple disease (including potential fatal ones) I find it quite curious the claim that "not circumcising" might prevent disease. The truth is exactly the opposite. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) Father: Son, you are 18 and about to go off to college. I'm so glad that we had you circumcised to improve your sexual health. Son:So you mean I can have as much unprotected sex as I like and not contract AIDS or give my partners HPV? Father: No son, you can have as much unprotected sex as you like and..... have a reduced likelihood of those things happening. Son: A reduced likelihood. So you don't think I need to use a condom or abstain from sex until I marry a virgin? Father: Well, circumcision is all very well, but reduced likelihood is still, well, now I come to think of it, an enormous risk. And then there's pregnancy. So maybe, actually, you should use a condom or wait and marry a virgin after all. Sorry about the operation and the reduced sensitivity. Laura Edited January 10, 2011 by Laura Corin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Father: Son, you are 18 and about to go off to college. I'm so glad that we had you circumcised to improve your sexual health.Son:So you mean I can have as much unprotected sex as I like and not contract AIDS or give my partners HPV? Father: No son, you can have as much unprotected sex as you like and..... have a reduced likelihood of those things happening. Son: A reduced likelihood. So you don't think I need to use a condom or abstain from sex until I marry a virgin? Father: Well, circumcision is all very well, but reduced likelihood is still, well, now I come to think of it, an enormous risk. And then there's pregnancy. So maybe, actually, you should use a condom or wait and marry a virgin after all. Sorry about the operation and the reduced sensitivity. Laura A 60% reduction in the likelihood of contracting HIV is nothing to scoff at. Condoms break, stuff happens. I'll take a 60% reduction in contracting AIDS anytime, even if (alone) it is not 100% effective. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnaM Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I still have yet to see you cite any of the research that you are getting your information from. I have done extensive research on this, coming from a culture that does it routinely and my DH not, and have never heard such statistic. How do you account for the AAP no longer recommending it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I still have yet to see you cite any of the research that you are getting your information from. I have done extensive research on this, coming from a culture that does it routinely and my DH not, and have never heard such statistic. How do you account for the AAP no longer recommending it? Click on Laura's link. The World Heath Organization has come around on circumcision and I would expect other medical organizations will as well. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I was there for my son's circumcision. With a topical anesthetic, followed by a local anesthetic, it was a completely non-traumatic non-event. My child did not wince, much less cry. It is a very humane procedure that brings a life-time of benefits. Bill It isn't about the pain, although that is an issue as MOST doctors do NOT use proper anestetic. The cream takes at least 30 minutes to work and most doctors won't wait that long before starting. However, even if there is no pain then or after as it heals, it is still amputating a functional part of the anatomy on the off chance it might possibly prevent a disease. Diseases that can be better prevented with alternative strategies that don't require amputation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNative Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I was there for my son's circumcision. With a topical anesthetic, followed by a local anesthetic, it was a completely non-traumatic non-event. My child did not wince, much less cry. It is a very humane procedure that brings a life-time of benefits. Bill Not only do I agree 100% with you, SpyCar, but I could have written this post. Dang, did you see that pig flying? Back to the topic, I was there for all three of my boys circs. They didn't wince, they didn't cry. I don't really care if someone chooses to circ or not, it is a family decision. I will say that it did not affect my boys at all. At least I don't think they go to bed and dream of the foreskin that could have been.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 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: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 A 60% reduction in the likelihood of contracting HIV is nothing to scoff at. Condoms break, stuff happens. I'll take a 60% reduction in contracting AIDS anytime, even if (alone) it is not 100% effective. Bill If it did that then why are the HIV rates in the US so high? It most certainly does NOT reduce the likelihood of contraction by 60% If it did that then theoretically our rates should be LOWER than Europe's and they are NOT. They are higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 If it did that then why are the HIV rates in the US so high? It most certainly does NOT reduce the likelihood of contraction by 60% The transmission rates among heterosexuals in the US is very low. The multiple studies that show reduced HIV contraction were for heterosexual transmission. And they do show a greatly reduced chance of contracting HIV in this way among circumcised men. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangermom Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 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. I have! My good friend and neighbor has 3 boys, and did not circ them. Until, that is, her 5yo developed infection after infection and had to get circumcised. Now she wishes she had gotten it done for all 3 at birth, the ongoing pain and trauma was terrible for the little guy. I'm not saying I'm in favor of universal circumcision for boys (i'm not); but it does happen and there are sometimes reasons to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamamaloca Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Click on Laura's link. The World Heath Organization has come around on circumcision and I would expect other medical organizations will as well. Bill The things I've seen from the WHO recommend circ for certain populations, such as in Africa where HIV is pandemic. Do you have a source from them that has a universal recommendation of circ for all countries and populations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The transmission rates among heterosexuals in the US is very low. The multiple studies that show reduced HIV contraction were for heterosexual transmission. And they do show a greatly reduced chance of contracting HIV in this way among circumcised men. Bill Our transmission rates are higher than Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Not only do I agree 100% with you, SpyCar, but I could have written this post. Dang, did you see that pig flying? Back to the topic, I was there for all three of my boys circs. They didn't wince, they didn't cry. I don't really care if someone chooses to circ or not, it is a family decision. I will say that it did not affect my boys at all. At least I don't think they go to bed and dream of the foreskin that could have been.... My oldest went into shock from his circ. They refused to circ until the baby was 6mos old. His shock was so severe that he would not let anyone touch him except me, he slept for three days straight waking only from screaming due to nightmares of it. It was awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) The transmission rates among heterosexuals in the US is very low. You mean, men getting HIV from women? (As opposed to, say, women getting it from men who may use drugs or be intimate with other men.) I have no interest in entering a "debate" on this. However, there are many men/boys who get circumcised around the world at times other than birth. (I know men who remember being circumcised.) There are men who take pride in, say, being circumcised as part of an initiation into manhood. So, it's not always the case for all men that it is something that happens immediately after birth or that they don't chose for themselves. Just throwing that out there. Edited January 11, 2011 by stripe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jen in PA Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 My oldest went into shock from his circ. They refused to circ until the baby was 6mos old. His shock was so severe that he would not let anyone touch him except me, he slept for three days straight waking only from screaming due to nightmares of it. It was awful. :grouphug::grouphug::grouphug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAutumnOak Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Circumcision is better on every front. Less risk of disease, and more hygienic. Bill My husband agrees with you and had all three of my boys circ'd, even though he is not...I didn't want it done, but had to get over it...I don't think it will make an enormous difference in someone's life either way... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAutumnOak Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 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.QUOTE] I am not a fan of routine circ, and didn't want it done...But this happened to my BIL and he had to get circ'd as an adult...That is the reason my husband insisted on the boys being circ'd,... I feel if you don't want to do it, don't...If you do, then do...No one knows what the future will bring for each child, and you have to do what you feel is best...And if it doesn't turn out how you wanted it to, just know that you made the best decision you knew how to make at the time...You are not irresponsible for choosing either choice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KatieH Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 :cursing: I'll just stick with that, or I might get banned. Blargh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KatieH Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) .. Edited January 11, 2011 by KatieH ARRRGGGGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 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.QUOTE] I am not a fan of routine circ, and didn't want it done...But this happened to my BIL and he had to get circ'd as an adult...That is the reason my husband insisted on the boys being circ'd,... I feel if you don't want to do it, don't...If you do, then do...No one knows what the future will bring for each child, and you have to do what you feel is best...And if it doesn't turn out how you wanted it to, just know that you made the best decision you knew how to make at the time...You are not irresponsible for choosing either choice... Can someone explain to me why this is a reason for routine infant circumcision? Why not just wait and see? Considering the chances of ever needing to be circumcised are SOOOO small it seems so odd to me to amputate a valuable organ on every boy, just to prevent a treatable infection. And yes, there are rare cases where the problem does require circumcision, but boys who are circumcised as infants sometimes require additional surgery later on to correct adhesions. So doing it as an infant doesn't guarantee that future surgery won't be needed. So I'm totally missing the logic here.:confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakia Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Katie, For some reason, logic rarely comes into play when circumcision is discussed. It's unfortunate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.