Oh No! It's Another Thread About Circumcision.

[bort138]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

I think circumcision was a plot by the lube manufacturing companies since they knew cut guys would need it.

Actually it's the cosmetic industry.

Human Foreskins are Big Business for Cosmetics - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

 

[RaKroma]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

Posting scientific studies on circumcision in gay forums is like posting evolutionary biology research for Creationists. It Ain't gonna matter at the end of the day.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

I think "hygiene" is one of those "reality has two faces" moments.

Guys who have problem foreskins think "Wow, I'd be a lot less sore and tender down there, and frankly fresh, if I could just get a circumcision" and they do, and sure enough they're right. So as far as they're concerned it "proves" that circumcision works.

While guys with healthy foreskins that have no problem washing themselves are thinking "Are you crazy? Why would I chop off a problem-free part of my body? Hygiene - grab a fucking washcloth!" So as far as they're concerned it is "obvious" that circumcision is worthless.

But that's like telling someone "No, you should never have your tonsils out. Mine are just fine, therefore yours are too." Well, I needed my tonsils out, I got them out as an adult, and I'm better off. I don't regret it. I don't feel mutilated. I am actually healthier. Some guys probably are better off getting circumcised.

The only issue I have is the idea it should be done without a baby's consent if there is no obvious medical problem. I doubt the journal would say "Let's just give every baby a tonsillectomy. Just in case."

Which is why it is the parents decision. The parents are the ones charged with the child's welfare until (s)he is old enough to make decisions for themselves.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

Thank you very much for that info. I have always been intrigued as to when it became prevalent in the US and why it did. Your info has filled in some gaps.

Interestingly it is still uncomon in the UK apart from in certain religions, so I was always interested as to why the US was different. It would be interesting to know why the UK didn't "convert" to the extent that the US did. Is it still around 80% in the US? Do each individual set of parents make the decision or is it more or less automatic? Presumably parents have to at least give consent.

The rate is down considerably due to the negative image being promoted of the procedure and earlier studies suggesting the procedure had no real medical benefits. It was always the parents decision but by the 60s and 70s parents deciding not to do it was the exception not the rule. Now it gotten to be the other way round.

 

[Telstra]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

Which is why it is the parents decision. The parents are the ones charged with the child's welfare until (s)he is old enough to make decisions for themselves.

But most parents make their decisions for religious and cultural reason.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

But most parents make their decisions for religious and cultural reason.

I'd have to see some surveys to agree to that, at its height most parents were doing it for hygienic reasons, mine did and my wife and I did also. Outside of Jewish and Muslim communities, I've seen little evidence that Christian families had the procedure done for religious reasons.

 

[Telstra]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

I'd have to see some surveys to agree to that, at its height most parents were doing it for hygienic reasons, mine did and my wife and I did also. Outside of Jewish and Muslim communities, I've seen little evidence that Christian families had the procedure done for religious reasons.

I'm talking about Jewish and Muslims.
A perfectly great penis will be chop off the foreskin for no medical benefit.

 

[KaraBulut]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

Another quick question: why did the Victorians think it would discourage masturbation?

The Yanks took a hold of the idea, and went crazy with it. The mindset still pervades the nation's mindset to some extent.

Ever wonder why there's a cock on the box of Kellogg's corn flakes?

 

[bankside]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

Which is why it is the parents decision. The parents are the ones charged with the child's welfare until (s)he is old enough to make decisions for themselves.

It is the parents' decision when a doctor agrees there is an obvious medical problem. Parents have no other legitimate right to have surgery performed on their son's penis. Even if there is a medical problem, they don't have a "right" to do it, they have a responsibility. And a normal healthy foreskin is not a medical problem.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

I'm talking about Jewish and Muslims.
A perfectly great penis will be chop off the foreskin for no medical benefit.

It seems the pediatricians disagree with you on that last point now.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

It is the parents' decision when a doctor agrees there is an obvious medical problem. Parents have no other legitimate right to have surgery performed on their son's penis. Even if there is a medical problem, they don't have a "right" to do it, they have a responsibility. And a normal healthy foreskin is not a medical problem.

Except that now you have doctors saying there is a medical benefit to having the procedure done.

 

[bankside]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

The doctors did not identify anything wrong with the penis, they are claiming a preventive benefit. Some obvious questions would be, can the boy still benefit if he chooses to get a circumcision later? If the kid has a burst appendix he can't benefit from having it removed later when he's old enough to consent in his own name because it could kill him.

And to make a habit of performing elective surgery on children requires an extraordinary benefit, not just this claim of "on balance."

On balance, it might be smarter to put statins in the drinking water or give babies gastric bands to stop the obesity epidemic. But we don't do these things because people have the personal right to weigh these decisions for themselves. Their parents do not; again, they only have responsibilities and duties, not rights, and only when the child needs something done that can't wait. Immunisation would be one of those "extraordinary benefits" situations where the ability to stop pandemics, the obvious protective effects for the child, and the lack of a trade off make it the right thing to do.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

The doctors did not identify anything wrong with the penis, they are claiming a preventive benefit. Some obvious questions would be, can the boy still benefit if he chooses to get a circumcision later? If the kid has a burst appendix he can't benefit from having it removed later when he's old enough to consent in his own name because it could kill him.

And to make a habit of performing elective surgery on children requires an extraordinary benefit, not just this claim of "on balance."

On balance, it might be smarter to put statins in the drinking water or give babies gastric bands to stop the obesity epidemic. But we don't do these things because people have the personal right to weigh these decisions for themselves. Their parents do not; again, they only have responsibilities and duties, not rights, and only when the child needs something done that can't wait. Immunisation would be one of those "extraordinary benefits" situations where the ability to stop pandemics, the obvious protective effects for the child, and the lack of a trade off make it the right thing to do.

It is the parents responsibility to make those decisions though and that is the law even if you think it should be different. Parents make many decisions for their children based on them being of a benefit to them 'on balance'. That is the role of parents in society and the care of children and that role should only be overridden when there is 'significant' evidence that their decisions are doing more harm than good for the child. The pediatricians in this case are saying that this surgery does not meet that criteria despite some people's objection to it so it is up to the parents to decide whether we like it or not.

 

[freefall]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

I just think the preventive benefit of circumcision is overrated. It is significant, but once people learn this and think they're safer because they're circumcised, the infection rate of both HPV and HIV/AIDS will remain high if not skyrocket.

 

[smoothmanfun]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

I have a surprise for you.

In pre-war UK, the circumcision rate amongst the British Upper Class was over 80%. Interesting, huh?
I believe it is still the custom in the Royal Family.

In the United States, the circumcision rate has dropped to about 55-60%. It is most prevalent in the Mid-West, and the rarest on the West Coast.

Here in Nevada, they ask the parent at birth. For the most part, Anglos circumcise, and Latinos don't.
lol. Your guess is as good as mine, Smoothman.

Funny thing, that. Victorianism originated with Queen Victoria. The Yanks took a hold of the idea, and went crazy with it. The mindset still pervades the nation's mindset to some extent.

The rate is down considerably due to the negative image being promoted of the procedure and earlier studies suggesting the procedure had no real medical benefits. It was always the parents decision but by the 60s and 70s parents deciding not to do it was the exception not the rule. Now it gotten to be the other way round.

Thanks for the info. It has always been a puzzle to me why the US and UK, culturally similar in so many ways, seemed to differ in respect to circumcision.

From your info it seems that the US went with a trend, or dare I say, a fad. But is now gradually levelling off towards the UK, again.

 

[bankside]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

It is the parents responsibility to make those decisions though and that is the law even if you think it should be different.

Fortunately, laws are starting to change; for example that court in Germany that recently had the courage to call it like it is. Laws sometimes need to change because they make the wrong choices. Think of all the laws that have stood in the way of equal marriage. And fortunately, parents do not have to wait for the law to tell them. They can realize that it's their son's body, their son's choice, and then leave it to him to decide.

 

[J-23]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

These findings are insignificant and meaningless. Just look at the hilarious way in which the conclusion was phrased. "The benefits outweigh the risks"? You could say that about almost ANY procedure performed by a qualified surgeon. "We chopped off our baby's right arm because the benefits of the operation outweigh the risks! Technically, nobody NEEDS two arms and he probably won't die from the amputation, PLUS he'll never suffer from the debilitating illnesses that so often plague those with right arms! Carpal tunnel syndrome, arthritis, broken bones, etc.!"

Give me a break.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

I just think the preventive benefit of circumcision is overrated. It is significant, but once people learn this and think they're safer because they're circumcised, the infection rate of both HPV and HIV/AIDS will remain high if not skyrocket.

Conservatives apply the exact same logic to condemn condom use.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

Fortunately, laws are starting to change; for example that court in Germany that recently had the courage to call it like it is. Laws sometimes need to change because they make the wrong choices. Think of all the laws that have stood in the way of equal marriage. And fortunately, parents do not have to wait for the law to tell them. They can realize that it's their son's body, their son's choice, and then leave it to him to decide.

The court in Germany has been soundly condemned by its own government and people and changes in the law are being put in place to nullify its ruling.

 

[Stardreamer]

Re: Benefits of circumcision outweigh risks, U.S. pediatrics group says

These findings are insignificant and meaningless. Just look at the hilarious way in which the conclusion was phrased. "The benefits outweigh the risks"? You could say that about almost ANY procedure performed by a qualified surgeon. "We chopped off our baby's right arm because the benefits of the operation outweigh the risks! Technically, nobody NEEDS two arms and he probably won't die from the amputation, PLUS he'll never suffer from the debilitating illnesses that so often plague those with right arms! Carpal tunnel syndrome, arthritis, broken bones, etc.!"

Give me a break.

Spurious logic, the cost benefit analysis of having two arms over one arm are clear and far outweigh the potential risks you bring up. That is not the case with this study.