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

Because Cultures are about Tradition Truffle. Not a religion per se.

Cote we do know what the OP is talking about, when she says that it is very common in the US. I am using "mass programme" to refer to that. And she is asking, is it really justified? and my view is, no, not on that scale, not in that country.

An error of an argument. Said by someone who didn't accept their error that the studies they keep quoting don't include Europe and only applied to a certain area. Rightyo then cote I bow to your superior wisdom.

Beast just give up and admit you're wrong damn it! .

Truffle if I may repeat. I explained that Religion and Cultural are not always intertwined and explained this by giving the example of my Exs' family. They are predominantly Roman Catholic but advocate Circumcision because as Nigerians, It is Tradition (Cultural).

I didn't say Beast is wrong, Pixie.

You are wrong, though.

HTH

Yes Yes Cote. Everyone else is wrong on here unless they agree with you even after pointing out the centralised studies. . Feel better now?

I guess you feel better by taking the mickey, because you just can't hold your own in a debate between adults.

That's fine, but please now let adults get back to the debate.

Well like I said ten pages back cote. If you stopped being condescending towards others like person and escrow for example who disagree on a subject matter you might find adults willing to debate with you. Hth.

I think we are nearly there, cote. At least so far as the OP's question goes, I think we both agree that, while there may be a case for circumcision in some individual cases and in some communities, there is no good argument for doing it in the US on the current scale?

*davros not escrow. Autocorrect fail.

very posh auto-correct you've got there, pixie

Beast I can't fault you for trying! :). Truffle it would be interesting to see how many other communities do it for cultural reasons don't you think? I'm guessing they don't go on studies as Its not to document the health benefits in centralised areas.

Beast . I'm as common as muck me. Clearly been given this phone by mistake.

Corus - I don't agree with you, but you have the right to have an opinion on me, I suppose.

If you don't mind, I'll go back to the debate. Maybe you can talk with Pixie about your grievances.

Beast - "At least so far as the OP's question goes, I think we both agree that, while there may be a case for circumcision in some individual cases and in some communities, there is no good argument for doing it in the US on the current scale?"

There is an argument for doing it on an individual scale, so it is hard to argue against it when it is done by large portions of the population.

If US federal state was pushing it as "Everyone must be circumcised because it is terribly necessary for us all in the US", I would agree with you there would be no good reason for that. However, as it stands now, people only have the option to circumcise their children and most of them take that option. I don't see a problem with that.

No we will talk where we like cote. What with it being a public forum and all .

I didn't say you couldn't talk here

Maybe you can talk with Pixie about your grievances yep. My point on being twattishly condescending stands. Now if we can get back to that non childish adult debate you keep asking everyone to discuss. That'd be grand.

Corus I've seen worse than that on Mumsnet!

Please stop MissPixie. I don't care.

Yeh we've kind of noticed cote . Anyway Truffle if you look halfway up you will see I did reply to you re the religion and cultural differences. Although very thin.

Cote, you are stating the following as fact:

"(1) circumcision does indeed provide health benefits including reduced risk for some infections in the early years."

This is very debatable. Circumcision does reduce the risk of UTI, but the risk of a UTI is low anyway and there are risks associated with the procedure. As one study puts it "Assuming equal utility of benefits and harms, net clinical benefit is likely only in boys at high risk of UTI."

As has already been pointed out numerous times, the WHO advice for countries with a high HIV rate, is only relevant to those countries.