Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Results 1 to 1 of 1

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #1
    Glia's Avatar
    Glia
     

    Bad Science Doesn't Justify Male Circumcision

    For that matter, it does not justify any form of genital cutting on children. Favorite quote from this op-ed:

    "Perhaps the major reason why parents and doctors still advocate infant circumcision is because doing otherwise forces them to address a serious issue: That they’ve spent decades doing something medically and morally wrong."

    There are a few factual errors in the text and he refers to an intact, normal manhood as "uncircumcised", but the premise and conclusion are valid. The song/video is worth a gander, too.
    ----
    Bad Science Doesn't Justify Male Circumcision

    Roland Hulme Special to Salem-News.com Includes the brand new song by Agron Belica, Say No to Circumcision - Leave Those Babies Alone!

    NEW YORK) - Doctors still attempt to promote the unnecessary and unethical practice of male infant circumcision – and have begun using increasingly questionable science to support their argument. America is moving the right direction. Whereas 80 percent of infant boys were once circumcised — parts of their genitalia torn or cut from their bodies, without consent and often without anesthesia — today only 30 percent of new parents elect to subject their children to this brutal procedure.

    But there are forces trying to reverse this trend.

    “Circumcision is a simple surgery that’s been performed for over 6,000 years,” writes Dr. Aaron Tobian in the Journal of the American Medical Association. “Clearly it’s safe to perform, and it has clear medical benefits.”

    Dr. Tobian and his colleague, Dr. Ronald Gray, wrote this recent piece as part of a campaign to push back against the growing movement questioning the benefits and ethics of infant male circumcision. The problem is, they’re using defunct science to do so.

    “If a vaccine were available that reduced HIV risk by 60 percent, as male circumcision does, the medical community would rally behind the immunization,” they claim.

    The problem is, such statistics are utterly misleading.

    The great fallacy in the debate about circumcision as a means to reduce HIV transmission is that the statistics come from Africa; where HIV transmission occurs largely through heterosexual sex.

    In the United States, the vast majority of HIV infections occur amongst men who have sex with men (MSM) — with the rate of new HIV infections amongst MSM standing at 44 times the rate for heterosexual men (Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention).

    In addition the Journal Of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes report: “there is no evidence that being circumcised is protective against HIV infection among MSM.”

    Promoting circumcision in America will not reduce the HIV transmission rates as they have done in Africa, because the demographics are starkly different.

    Want proof? ...

    Read the rest at https://www.salem-news.com/articles/...science-rh.php
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by:

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-02-2018, 12:59 PM
  2. How Male Circumcision Harms Women
    By Glia in forum WaccoReader
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-16-2011, 11:14 PM
  3. SF Could Vote on Male Circumcision Ban (CNN)
    By Glia in forum WaccoReader
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-05-2011, 01:24 PM
  4. bad science and skeptics...
    By JuliaB in forum WaccoReader
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-31-2009, 12:05 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-2008, 09:27 AM

Bookmarks