Friday, August 11, 2006

Circumcision decreases AIDS risk in men

circumcision is once again in the news. Please read this article before you decide not to circumcise you really want to educate. If you circumcise (and I hope you do) please consider doing the circumcision on the 8th day. There is a reason why Jewish culture uses the 8th day. It appears that the blood clots better on this day and that the children seem to be less sensitive to pain. I have not found the studies that show this but I believe they are out there as I remember hearing at a theologic conference about this. What I have not found is a study that shows that circumcision leaves men scared for life from the trauma.

If you are in the Houston area, Dr. Max Mintz on antoine blvd, is a pediatrician and rabbi and has performed thousands of these. My son Spencers came out pretty good if I do say so myself :)


At 2:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Extra food for thought: a friend of mine married a man who was not circumcised, something she never was exposed to. It was something that grossed her out and it became a big issue in their marriage. A circumcised penis is a lot nicer to look at and handle then one that is not.

At 4:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent, love it! »

At 3:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe it's a surprise to you but the "AIDS declining in circumcised men" theory is not at all a scientific analysis of anything. There are cemeteries in America full of circumcised men who died of AIDS! If you thought cutting your son's foreskin would mean he could never become HIV positive, you are sadly mistaken. Ten years from now when your son is on the internet and he finds out his circumcision was not only unnecessary it was not recommended by any medical association in the developed world, I hope you have an answer for why you paid to cut the most sensitive part of his penis off.

At 3:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's amazing---you actually ADMIT you take medical advice from a theological conference?! Shocking. Does the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners know about this? What else, do you prescribe baptism to clear one's acne?? The AMA and the AAP officially do NOT recommend circumcision. Surprised? Maybe you should be checking out medical sources for your information, not religious ones.

At 4:14 PM, Anonymous jimmy said...

That's odd, the top of your blog says natural health and alternative healing. But you are advocating circumcision? Anyone with half a brain cell can figure out that circumcision is unnatural, because *naturally* all men are uncircumcised. You're also not advocating "alternative" healing, but a traditional method that has been proven time and again useless. Were you intentionally lying when you wrote that natural and alternative heading, or are you sincerely that naive?

At 4:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How ridiculous. In what way will cutting off the most sexually sensitive tissue from your child's penis do any more to protect him or his partner from AIDS than a simple condom and safe-sex education would?

The answer is clear, and any man who thinks that having a denuded penis will protect him from AIDS is in for something of a rude awakening.

Educate yourself, "doctor," before you go advocating sexual mutilation of the helpless, hm?

And this:

"A circumcised penis is a lot nicer to look at and handle then one that is not."

How utterly disturbing. In some cultures, a woman's labia and clitoris are considered "gross," and removed at puberty, for the benefit of her future husband's aesthetic tastes. By your logic, this cosmetic surgery is acceptable then?

If I decide that I find female breasts "gross," am I permitted to remove my daughter's breasts at birth? After all, breast cancer is far more common than the penile ailments used to justify male genital mutilation, yes?

"Whatever is done to stop the terrible practice of
circumcision will be of tremendous importance. There
is no rational medical reason to support it. It is high time
that such a barbaric practice comes to an end."

In all of biology, the nonengineered individual is the strongest. All
of his parts are there for an excellent purpose.

- Ronald Poland, MD (American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force
Committee on Circumcision)

-Frederick Leboyer, M.D., author, "Birth
Without Violence"

At 4:50 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I have not found the studies that show this but I believe they are out there as I remember hearing at a theologic conference about this."

I can only roll my eyes at this. Any parent who would accept this as credible reason for skinning their child's penis should be banned from parenthood.

"What I have not found is a study that shows that circumcision leaves men scared for life from the trauma."

The scars are quite visible on any cut man, "doc." Scar type varies with method used, but most commonly takes the form of a ring of necrotic (dead) tissue around the shaft of the penis. Keratinization (callousing) of the glans could also be considered a form of scar, as it desensitizes that region rather dramatically. Further, removal of the frenulum, ridged band, etc., while leaving no scarring per se, have dramatic ramifications for male sexuality.

At 4:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As long as we're accepting "theological" arguments for circing, let's add this to the list!

"To these [reasons for circumcision] I would add that I consider circumcision to be a symbol of two things necessary to our well being. One is the excision of pleasures which bewitch the mind. For since among the love-lures of pleasure the palm is held by the mating of man and woman, the legislators thought good to dock the organ which ministers to such intercourse, thus making circumcision the figure of the excision of excessive and superfluous pleasure, not only of one pleasure, but of all the other pleasures signified by one, and that the most imperious.

--Philo of Alexandria, Of the special laws, Book I (ii), in Works of Philo, trans. F. H. Colson, Loeb Classical Library, 1937, Vol. VII, p. 105 (Philo of Alexandria (or Judaeus) was a leading Jewish philosopher living in Alexandria early in the 1st Century.)

At 5:41 PM, Blogger TLC Tugger said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 5:44 PM, Blogger TLC Tugger said...

The "controlled" trials in Africa are not very compelling, in light of the fact that circumcised men in Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Tanzania have markedly higher AIDS incidence than their intact counterparts. AIDS is more rare in non-cutting Japan than it is in 95%-cut Israel. The US developed 3 times the AIDS problem Europe has while most US men were cut and most Europeans were intact. The foreskin does not cause AIDS.

The African men cut in the Kenya and Uganda trials CONTRACTED HIV at a rate SIX TIMES HIGHER than the rate of new infection for African-American men. Whatever's going on in Africa, it's not an AIDS vaccine. Most of the half-million US men who have died of AIDS were circumcised at birth. Circumcison does not prevent AIDS.

It costs the UN just 3 cents to give away a condom, which protects a man, AND his partner, AND prevents pregnancy. Ah, HAH! The Bush administration thinks that's a sin. No wonder this outrageous human amputation experiment was carried out with the blessing of his NIH.

At 5:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

More food for thought:

A woman who needs a deskinned penis in order to obtain her sexual pleasure is beyond psychiatric help. If you cut a little girls genitals at birth you'd be called a misogynist. So it stands to reason that you are a misandrist if you force a partial penile amputation on a little baby boy.

A circ'd penis is nicer to look at? Depends on who you ask. I personally pity the sight of a deskinned penis, which I know was done by force. It looks raw and overexposed.

Circ is no silver bullet for preventing HIV, you'd be a fool to have sex without a condom no matter what your 'status' was.

Please remember there are graves and graves full of circ'd AIDS victims here in the US and beyond.

Circumcision is a very personal decision. The key word here is PERSON. It should always be left up to the 'person' who has to live with & use the penis. It's very considerate to ask someone before you chop off part of their body that will never grow back. :)

At 8:38 PM, Blogger Michael said...

You are a Jerk advocating Jerkumcision. You probably have not heard this yet, but circumcision is now considered the worst child rape ever that leaves not only physical scarring but also a life long psychological damage in its victim. Soon you will be in Jail, Mother Earth Fucker and Penis Butcher!

At 11:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

interestingly, i find a circumcised penis to be 'gross' -- knowing that it has been altered with a knife. i am an artist who loves the beauty of the natural body.

as a female WASP, born and raised in kansas who was (euphemistically) "circumcised" when i was a child, i cannot look at a surgically altered penis without feeling deep sorrow and compassion for the child who was hurt... pity.

I know there was a child who was traumatized by that very primal wound. so i don't see a huge difference between mutilating me -- and other females -- and taking a knife to the genitals of an innocent baby boy. either gender suffers.

and not only the body is altered. my book is the 'rape of innocence'. "circumcision" is sexual assault. child abuse.

THINK about it.

At 7:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pretty much a consensus, but has the natural doctor who wants babies cut looked at the Number Needed to Treat, ie the number of babies circumcised in vain to prevent one case of HIV? In the US, I think it's in the region of 350. And the rate of complications of circumcision? Considerably more. As for "less pain on the 8th day", I've never seen that before and doubt very much that it has any basis in fact. Why should it? The baby's nervous system develops steadily, it doesn't backslide. Just self-serving nonsense.

At 7:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
-- Voltaire, philosopher (1694-1778)

At 10:04 AM, Anonymous Dionne said...

As a former medical student and graduate student in public policy, particularly bioethics and health policy, I can tell you that the research stating that circumcision decreases the risk of AIDS is suspect, at best. But even IF youchoose to believe it, circumcision during infancy is absolutely assenine. Creating an open wound in an area where urine and fecal exposure is guaranteed is downright stupid. Many little boys die in the U.S. every year as a result of circumcision - some from systemic infections occurring from such contamination on the wound site. We don't know exactly how many, as the medical establishment refuses to compile and disclose those statistics. FINALLY, to my ignorant sisters who have bought into the myth that circumcised is better, I have enough experience with both to tell you that you are much deceived. I did more than my share of sampling and sex with an uncircumcised man is by far superior - for both the man and the woman. Get over the prissiness you were taught, own your sexuality, and let men keep all the tissue God gave them OR give up your own clitoris. YOUR CHOICE!


Post a Comment

<< Home