Are you circumcised?

[Insanity]

As our two neighborhood docs have said, there really isn't a medically justifiable reason to circumcise a newborn. It's an aesthetic issue. So let's put the procedure in the correct category: it's a cosmetic surgery.

Me: Like most boys born in England at the time, circumcised. Wish I wasn't.

[shoe]

I am the mother of two sons who are 3 years apart. With the first son, I asked my husband and he insisted on circumcision. Then we became caregivers to my FIL who was NOT circumcised and I would have to bathe him when hubby was out of town on business. When the second son was born I insisted he be cut. It had no face!

[mark500]

It's mostly cosmetic.

However:
Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis almost exclusively occurs in the uncircumcised. I observed the surgery of an adult man with SCC having his penis surgically removed.

Some of our friends decided not to circumcise their baby years ago. The kid had several episodes of balantitis (infection/inflammation of the glans penis in uncircumsized), and finally had a circumcision as a teenager. It's a much bigger deal to have an adult circumcision.

Anyone read the book, "The Boy who was Raised as a Girl"?

At the age of 6 months, after concern was raised about how Bruce and Brian urinated, both boys were diagnosed with phimosis. They were referred for circumcision at the age of 8 months. In 1966, doctors performed the circumcision using an unconventional method in which skin would be burned. The procedure did not go as doctors had planned, and Bruce's penis was burned beyond surgical repair...

David Reimer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Meadbh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark500 It's mostly cosmetic. However: Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis almost exclusively occurs in the uncircumcised. I observed the surgery of an adult man with SCC having his penis surgically removed. Some of our friends decided not to circumcise their baby years ago. The kid had several episodes of balantitis (infection/inflammation of the glans penis in uncircumsized), and finally had a circumcision as a teenager. It's a much bigger deal to have an adult circumcision. Anyone read the book, "The Boy who was Raised as a Girl"? At the age of 6 months, after concern was raised about how Bruce and Brian urinated, both boys were diagnosed with phimosis. They were referred for circumcision at the age of 8 months. In 1966, doctors performed the circumcision using an unconventional method in which skin would be burned. The procedure did not go as doctors had planned, and Bruce's penis was burned beyond surgical repair... David Reimer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See my earlier post for a link to the book on Amazon.com. It is required reading for all our pediatric residents.

[Letj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark500 It's mostly cosmetic. Some of our friends decided not to circumcise their baby years ago. The kid had several episodes of balantitis (infection/inflammation of the glans penis in uncircumsized), and finally had a circumcision as a teenager. It's a much bigger deal to have an adult circumcision.

That's because a lot of men are not taught by their parents how to care for their uncircumcized penises. This may be because some families are such prudes and sexually repressed that they are afraid their boys may do more than just clean them. I distinctly remember my mother (non-American) teaching her sons how to slide back the tip of the penis and carefully wash.

[honobob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Letj That's because a lot of men are not taught by their parents how to care for their uncircumcized penises. This may be because some families are such prudes and sexually repressed that they are afraid their boys may do more than just clean them. I distinctly remember my mother (non-American) teaching her sons how to slide back the tip of the penis and carefully wash.

Yeah, we guys need a commercial where Dad and Son are out on the swing set and sonny says, "hey dad, do you ever worry that you're not fresh?" ........April Adam, when you want to be April shower fresh.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Letj That's because a lot of men are not taught by their parents how to care for their uncircumcized penises. This may be because some families are such prudes and sexually repressed that they are afraid their boys may do more than just clean them.

So , you have made a study of American traditions of male hygeine training? Otherwise, on what do you base your rather broad statement?

Ha

[honobob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha broad statement? Ha

haha you kill me! But I do have a memory, one of my earliest, of my Grandma, who was no prude scrubbing me down and then handing me the wash cloth to "finish"? I was 6 and I figured it out. Weird. Waitaminnit. Your mothers sons = your brothers. Thankfully six of my sisters were younger. There's no free show here.

[socca]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladelfina I tend to think anything natural is made that way for a reason...

So why did evolution result in human males almost universally born with foreskins?? If you have a mixed group of human males, some born with foreskins and some born without, why would the ones with genes directing the creation of foreskins come to dominate the human gene pool?

ladelfina may have provided an answer: sexual selection. If human females strongly prefer sexual partners with foreskins, then the poor guys born without would have fewer mating opportunities and thus their genes would have much more trouble getting inserted into subsequent generations.

Of course, this game can be played both ways. We men may have selected women for bigger breasts at the same time that the women were selecting men for foreskins.

[Frugality_of_Apathy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporateburnout There is however other medical reasons that make it essential to be circumcised like "Phimosis" where the foreskin will not retract and at times cause extreme pain during intercourse. I know what I am talking about because I was surgically circumcised at the age of 20 and believe me the recovery was not fun at all. We had our son done at birth.

Why not just compromise and if the foreskin is extremely long just remove that little extra bit instead of the whole thing?

You don't chop off your fingertips because nails that are too long will cause pain and break.

[jug]

Little moishe is getting annoyed, he suggests that you bring this topic over to the discussion on TIPS.

Moishe figures he may as well earn some interest and he's not bothered by inflation either. He thinks inflation is good.

jug

[JPatrick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Letj That's because a lot of men are not taught by their parents how to care for their uncircumcized penises. This may be because some families are such prudes and sexually repressed that they are afraid their boys may do more than just clean them.

The cure for the "do more than just clean them" problem is not that difficult. Simply remind them that the doing more thing is a leading cause of blindness...

Really it is, Mom said so.

[mark500]

Circumcision is effective in limiting HIV transmission.

We now have confirmation — from large, carefully controlled, randomized clinical trials —showing definitively that medically performed circumcision can significantly lower the risk of adult males contracting HIV through heterosexual intercourse," said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease. "While the initial benefit will be fewer HIV infections in men, ultimately adult male circumcision could lead to fewer infections in women in those areas of the world where HIV is spread primarily through heterosexual intercourse."

[Trek]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark500 Circumcision is effective in limiting HIV transmission. "While the initial benefit will be fewer HIV infections in men, ultimately adult male circumcision could lead to fewer infections in women in those areas of the world where HIV is spread primarily through heterosexual intercourse."

Africa?

[Frugality_of_Apathy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark500 Circumcision is effective in limiting HIV transmission. We now have confirmation — from large, carefully controlled, randomized clinical trials —showing definitively that medically performed circumcision can significantly lower the risk of adult males contracting HIV through heterosexual intercourse," said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease. "While the initial benefit will be fewer HIV infections in men, ultimately adult male circumcision could lead to fewer infections in women in those areas of the world where HIV is spread primarily through heterosexual intercourse."

A more effective method would be to disabuse them of the idea that having sex with a virgin can cure aids.

[samclem]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark500 Circumcision is effective in limiting HIV transmission. We now have confirmation — from large, carefully controlled, randomized clinical trials —showing definitively that medically performed circumcision can significantly lower the risk of adult males contracting HIV through heterosexual intercourse," said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease. "While the initial benefit will be fewer HIV infections in men, ultimately adult male circumcision could lead to fewer infections in women in those areas of the world where HIV is spread primarily through heterosexual intercourse."

Apparently, the positive impact of circumcision is fairly substantial:
(Source)

Quote:

March 29, 2007 -- Circumcised men are up to 60% less likely to get HIV, and now the World Health Organization and the UNAIDS program recommend adult surgery to slow the AIDS pandemic. The recommendation comes only weeks after the WHO and UNAIDS officials asked an expert panel for advice. The advice is based on three clinical trials suggesting that circumcised men are 50% to 60% less likely than uncircumcised men to get HIV during heterosexual sex.

The study was conducted in Uganda by Johns Hopkins researchers, and apparently was very well controlled.

So, if you think AIDS will still be a problem when your child is sexually active-- this info is certainly worth considering.

Sometimes the cultural/religious practices adopted over many centuries are just superstitions and have no relevancy in the modern world. OTOH, sometimes they remain relevant.

[eridanus]

Woman have >8% chance of getting breast cancer in their lifetimes. We don't automatically perform breast mastectomies at age 20 (when the chance is .05%), or at menopause (3%). Why is it ok to perform genital mutilation in the off chance that your son might have sex with a woman who has the AIDS virus? The AIDS rate in North America is 0.11%. It's far more likely that your son will turn out gay and have sex with a man, in which case the study doesn't apply (the study was for heterosexual sex).


Those in support can trot out their reasons but, let's face it, the disease percentages aren't what's in the forefront of their minds when the choice is given to them. It's about culture or religion or cleanliness (Is cleanliness really a reason?!? Or is this some sort of cognizant dissonance?).

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus Woman have >8% chance of getting breast cancer in their lifetimes. We don't automatically perform breast mastectomies at age 20 (when the chance is .05%), or at menopause (3%). Why is it ok to perform genital mutilation in the off chance that your son might have sex with a woman who has the AIDS virus? The AIDS rate in North America is 0.11%. It's far more likely that your son will turn out gay and have sex with a man, in which case the study doesn't apply (the study was for heterosexual sex). Those in support can trot out their reasons but, let's face it, the disease percentages aren't what's in the forefront of their minds when the choice is given to them. It's about culture or religion or cleanliness (Is cleanliness really a reason?!? Or is this some sort of cognizant dissonance?).

I appreciate the intent behind your analogy, but there is quite a difference between underdoing a bilateral mastectomy (risk, pain, body image, cost etc. etc.) and a circumcision (15 minutes and a week or two to recover, minimal risk).

Not saying circumcision is or isn't a good idea (I think it's an individual choice issue), but the analogy might be a bit strained.

Amazing how much interest this post gathered.

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa Amazing how much interest this post gathered.

Makes you wonder how many posts would be generated on the topic of sweaters: crew neck or turtle neck?

[Trek]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa Amazing how much interest this post gathered.

It's the catchy title. Turns out to be a bit more controversial than I would have guessed. I do appreciate all the responses though. I think we'll likely take the good Canadian doctors advice of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Seems like solid medical advice.