WTF? "Half of all uncircumcised males will, over the course of their lifetime, develop some kind of medical issue related to their foreskin."

[missingwelliesinsd]

Question as a Brit in the USA. I just read this news article on the never-ending debate (in the USA at least) of whether it's better to circumcise male babies. Some paper just issued by the Mayo Clinic concluded that the benefits out weigh the risks 100-1 and it would be unethical to not circumcise a male baby just it it would be if you don't get immunizations for your child. WTF?

I know that circumcising can help reduce STD transmissions - but hey, just use a condom! What I can't believe is that "50% of non-circumcised males have medical issues with their foreskins." That would make 50% of most of the male population of Europe having foreskin issues at some point. Can this be right? I tend to think it's just American prejudice against foreskins after decades of snipping. I'm TTC and if I do and we have a boy, no way am I snipping the poor thing.

Here's the article:
jezebel.com/circumcision-rates-decline-in-the-u-s-1557539810

I was saying that the so called 'research' supporting that 50% of uncircumcised men have health issues is a gross rationalisation.

thebody they actually do. One wrong move or jerk and things can to terribly wrong.

I've been to many circumcisions. Sometimes, I've even seen the baby sleep through.

Out of all my friends with a similar background to mine and family who have sons, they've all circumcised them as newborns. They are all westernised, educated professionals, mostly secular, who are just as able to make an informed choice for the good of their child as anyone else on here. They love their children and care for their children just as well as anyone on here as well. And, yet, they've ALL chosen to circumcise and it's a valid decision. The research shows benefits, not unequivocal enough for routine circumcisions but good enough for those considering circumcision as a valid option. Here's just one link (blah, blah, blah, it's all about the money, the damn Jewish lobby etc etc - sorry, don't buy it, that's just not accepting that there are benefits)
pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/3/e756

It's not mutilation, it's not abuse and that is why it is also not illegal.

You may choose not to do it to your child, that's fair enough. I wouldn't call you an abuser for not doing it.

I thought the response to the poster who said she'd circumcised her child was incredibly rude and highlights to me the level of the debate.

Prima please don't assume I ignorant because I don't agree with you. I am a trained HCP.

My stance is very simple.

Consent needed for essentially a cosmetic procedure done because it's always been done and one that not only causes horrific pain but life long mutilation.

Consent consent consent.

It's not racist/xenophobic it's a very simple rule.

Unless it's needed for a medical reason then it's not needed.

I detest ear piercing in babies too.

thebody

You hit the nail on the head - that bloody Jewish lobby in the US, influencing research to get what they want. How do they get away with it? What with them controlling the media and all that?

This is exactly what I mean.

'You may choose not to do it to your child, that's fair enough. I wouldn't call you an abuser for not doing it.'

Well obviously. You couldn't very well call someone an abuser for leaving their son's foreskin intact now could you?

The sooner this barbaric practice is banned the better a place this world would be.

Given that there's evidence that the benefits outweight the risks, one could make the case that someone not circumcising is an abuser. I wouldn't personally. But then again, i wouldn't go down to the kind of language used here against people who do circumcise. Disgusting bullying.

I think you should not be making decisions like this for your child. Sorry I just don't.

You see it as ok because it's the custom in your group of friends?

It been a custom to send kids up chimneys and bind girls feet.

It's the custom in some cultures to cut off little girls lesbians snd clitoris and see their vagina up.

doesn't make it right does it.

Bullying or a visceral reaction to what is seen as a pointless procedure?

The AAP taskforce made thsi recommendation:

"Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, and the benefits of newborn male circumcision justify access to this procedure for those families who choose it."

You might not like the AAP (being made up of Jews and all that according to thebody) but they're a respected professional medical body and this is their recommendation.

Disgusting bullying from someone who watches babies being cut without anaesthetic!

Just wow.

No, I never said that the fact that it's common makes it right. I said that, on the whole, the benefits outweigh the risks (or at worst it's benign) which makes it a valid choice.

The point I was making is that the people who do make this choice, who I know personally, are more than capable of making informed choices for the benefit of their children.

thebody

I'm still very interested in your comment that 'research comes from the US where the Jewish lobby is huge'.

Do you have any evidence (other than the protocols of the elders of zion) to back up your assertion that the 'Jewish lobby' is somehow influencing scientific research? Or is that just your natural prejudice?

And many other medical bodies such as the NHS state that circumcision as a matter of course is completely unnecessary.

Shak plenty of research on this thread with links that dont agree with that research.

I really couldn't care about religions/customs/politics I care about pain being inflicted on babies and children.

Clearly you prefer to focus on other things.

That's between you and your conscience.

'the benefits outweigh the risks'

No they don't. You're rationalising.

So basically you have no evidence that research is being influenced by the 'Jewish lobby', yet you think it is? Why?

I know I won't get an answer. That's OK. It's just confirmed what I already about the posters on this thread.

Not me, animation, the American Academy of Pediatricians.

You think all posters on this thread who are opposed to circumcision are anti-semitic? That's quite a claim to make.

That's OK. It's just confirmed what I already about the posters on this thread.

What a ridiculous statement.

No, I didn't say that.

but I do think some of the comments about the Jewish lobby influencing research are quite telling. Definitely a strong under current.

Caruthers

Weren't you the one who told me that you all supported one another?

So what do you think about thebody's assertion? Don't you agree with it?

Prejudice now that's very very interesting.

I am not in the least prejudiced. I have no problem with any religion and am quite happy to live and let live.

My problem is with cruel child abusers that somehow tries to justify its practises with research based evidence.

Correct me but the Jewish political lobby in America is huge. You know that and we all know that.

Again look to the links on this thread that disagree with that research.

I Really don't care if you think you and your friends are able to make this choice for your children. You shouldn't be able to.

It's wrong.

"Caruthers*

Weren't you the one who told me that you all supported one another?

I said that we the majority on this thread don't agree with cutting bits of skin of babies up.

You're beginning to sound hysterical.