PB, one of the larger and more exhaustive studies was conducted in NZ which isn't exactly a a 3rd world nation. One of the governments currently reviewing its circ recommendations is the US, once again not a 3rd world nation.
The factors leading to increased transmission of disease have nothing to do with how often circed men clean their smegma out.
For me dismissing such a large body of evidence is kind of like saying that we don't need driver education or air bags because we have seat-belts.
As I said previously safe-sex education is a great idea however it has a history of failure.
""Meanwhile, researchers are debating whether the findings in Africa strengthen the case for circumcision to help halt HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases in western countries. Last week the UK's Health Protection Agency warned of a dramatic increase in cases of syphilis, while HIV and other STDs are also on the rise. Auvert doubts that there is a strong case. "All these factors imply it's very important for Africa, but it's not so clear for the rest of the world," he says. "You need high HIV prevalence to make circumcision programmes worthwhile."
The American Academy of Pediatrics says it is not yet ready to shift from the conclusion it published in 1999 that any evidence of medical benefit is too weak to merit routine circumcision of babies. However, Jack Swanson of the McFarland Clinic in Ames, Iowa, who co-authored the policy, says the academy would be revisiting it in the next two years to take account of the latest evidence from New Zealand, Africa and elsewhere. "Maybe it will lead to a change," he says.""
This is what I meant. I wont do it for medical reasons, when so far there is no where near enough evidence, for me, to justify it.
That said, if it is deemed a good medical practice, then so be it. If it is in their best interest, and not just a bit of a maybe, then of course I will reconsider.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks