Should Boys be Circumcised?

Recommend (6) Comments (0)

We will respond point-by-point to Schoen’s listed arguments.

1. Although Schoen claims that the moist inner surface of the foreskin is a magnet and refuge for infectious agents, in reality, the moistness of the foreskin contains pathogen-fighting substances, such as langerin. The human foreskin is nature’s protective device against infection.
        For more see evidence below.

The National Health and Social Life Survey reported more STD in circumcised men.
        For more see evidence below.

2. Men primarily from the circumcising cultures of Australia, Canada, and the United States are advancing the HIV claims. The Cochrane Review warned us to be wary of such claims because of the known emotional impact of circumcision and bias among researchers. Although the WHO has accepted such claims, the Centers for Disease Control has not. The CDC just reported a 40 percent increase in the number of infections among mostly circumcised Americans. The United States, with 75% of men circumcised, already had an HIV infection rate four times higher than mostly non-circumcised Europe. It is clear that the high rate of circumcision in the United States is not protecting Americans and may be contributory to the high incidence of HIV in the United States.
        For more see evidence below.

3. Although Schoen claims that the human papilloma virus (HPV) is more common in intact males, the studies have methodological flaws that render the conclusion dubious and unreliable. 
       For more see evidence below.

4. The National Health and Social Life survey found chlamydia only in circumcised men.
       For more see evidence below.

5. Chancroid is one of several genital ulcer diseases (GUDs). Non-circumcised men have a slightly greater risk of GUDs, but circumcised men have a greater risk of urethritis, including gonorrhea.
       For more see evidence below.

6. Dickson et al. found no significant difference in HPV infection between circumcised men and intact men.
      For more see evidence below.

Risks must be balanced against expected benefits in deciding about surgical operations. The alleged and unproven benefits of non-therapeutic circumcision are small, at best, while the known and proven risks and harms are significant. The balance falls in favor of genital integrity.

Recommend (0) Comments (2)

In the “counter” arguments to my points on HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, as well as my other points NOCIRC is displaying the “Groucho Marx Syndrome”. When one of his outrageous observations was challenged Grouch replied:  Who are you going to believe – me or you own 2 eyes?”   NOCIRCs version is – Who are you going to believe -  NOCIRC or the published scientific evidence. Here is some of the scientific evidence  I referred to regarding HIV and STIs:

1.     Auvert B, Talijaard D, Lagarde E, Sobngwi-Tambekou J, Sitta R, Puren A. Randomized, controlled intervention trial of male circumcisionfor reduction of HIV infection risk: theANRS 1265 Trial. PLoS Med 2005;2:e298 [published correction appears in PLoSMed.2006;3:e298].

2.    [6] Bailey RC, Moses S, Parker CB, Agot K, Maclean I, Krieger JN, et al. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in young men in Kisumu, Kenya: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:643–56.

3.    [7] Gray RH, Kigozi G, Serwadda D, Makumbi F, Watya S, Nalugoda F, et al. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in men in Rakai, Uganda: a randomized trial. Lancet 2007;369:657–66.

4.    Newell ML,Barnighausen T. Male circumcision to cut HIV risk in the general population. Lancet 2007, 369:617-619.

5.    Castellsagué X, Peeling RW, Franceschi S, et al; IARC Multicenter Cervical Cancer Study Group. Chlamydia trachomatis infection in female partners of circumcised and uncircumcised adult men. Am J Epidemiol 2005;162:907-916.

6.    Moses S, Bailey RC, Ronald AR. Male circumcision: assessment of health risks and benefits. Sex Transm Infect 74:368-373, 1998.

7.    Szabo R, Short RV. How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection? BMJ 320:1592-1594, 2000.

8.    Patterson BK, Landay A, Siegel JN, Flener Z, Pessis D, Chaviano A, Bailey RC.  Susceptibility to human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection of human foreskin and cervical tissue grown in explant culture. Am J Pathol 161:867-873, 2002.

9.    Castellsagué X, Bosch FX, Muños N, Meijer CJ, Shah KV, de SanJosé S, Eluf-Neto J, Ngelangel CA, Chichareon S, Smith JS, et al. Male circumcision, penile human papillomavirus infection, and cervical cancer in female partners. N Engl J Med 346:1105-1112, 2002.

This is just some of the science. Look it up. Then compare it to the opinions, theories, arguments, anecdotes and myths of NOCIRC.