Emperor1956
Posts: 2370
Joined: 11/7/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
While all of your credits might be true, there is current studies in the african nations investigating the theory that circumcision actually reduces the risks of HIV infection. One of the studies had NIH funding. Ah the old cut/uncut thread, again. First, I only read the last page. SO shoot Me. You hang around here long enough you could bind an entire Old Testament with foreskins. Anyway, Pandora is, as usual, correct. I too work with many public health officers and I've asked the question. On balance, if you are ONLY looking at health issues, there's a slight tilt in favor of cutting the little guy: 1. Penile cancer is virtually unknown in circumcised men. It is rare, but known in uncircumcised men. 2. The (female) partners of circumcised men show lower rates of cervical cancer. Again, its a small drop, but its there. And the studies attempt to control for all sorts of variables. This makes sense, on a cleanliness/infection model. But yes, if you clean John Henry with a good soap often, you may make this statistical difference insignificant. 3. HPV (human papilloma virus) is less readily transmitted by circumcised men. It appears, tho I don't think the differences are statistically significant, that chlymidia follows suit. Again, cleanliness might matter. now against that, you have to weigh the issues of a botched job and infection. Both are very rare, and yes, both can happen. Bottom line, its religious tradition/culture/choice if you ask Me. I suspect that you lower your overall cancer risk more by using sunscreen than getting cut. E.
_____________________________
"When you wake up, Pooh," said Piglet, "what's the first thing you say?" "What's for breakfast? What do you say, Piglet?" "I say, I wonder what's going to happen exciting today?" Pooh nodded thoughtfully. "It's the same thing," he said.
|