Circumcision increases autism risk???

[DinosaurTrain]

Eh?!

Obviously I don't believe it, but now pondering if we've added something to the birthing experience that is causing some cases??

Can anyone link the actual paper (not a media report of the paper)?

I think it's by Prof Morten Frisch, who a couple of years ago published something suggesting that a significantly larger number of circumcised men report sexual problems than do their intact peers, and that women in relationships with circumcised males report sexual problems more frequently than do women with intact partners.

I haven't found it but yes that's who the newspaper mentioned...

I suppose its possible that the trauma of having a body part chopped off could do something to the brain?

Not seen report, or report of report though.

I'd be very interested to read this, I don't have the foggiest how that would actually work

Erm, I'm anti routine infant circumcision, but relating it to autism is bonkers surely.

Why is it always autism anyway? What makes people so obsessed with it? Can't they pin something else on something random for a change?

But some uncircumcised people obv have autism too...

Have been racking my head to think if anything else gets chopped off and thought about the umbilical cord ? Any studies been done on the timing/way they do that?

It's literally only just breaking.

Daily Mail are in on it of course with a dubious picture of a surgeon with bloody hands (FFS!)

Only other report I can see is in Jewish News.

Give it until mid afternoon.

Yes lots of stuff about cord clamping, look on evidencebasedbirth.com, (well sourced/cited rather than being a good source in itself IYSWIM) but nowt to do with autism.

I think this may be being misconstrued.

I've just read something about natal analgesic exposure and autism. Surely it'll be that? The analgesic needed for circumcision could potentially lead to autism

*Prenatal and perinatal

Hmmm, not sure, because I thought only a topical anaesthetic is used. And in most cases (this was true six years ago, haven't checked if up to date) the "anaesthetic" is sugar water in a dummy, which is proven to have an anaesthetic effect, but it's extremely unlikely to work against the pain of a circumcision since it's about as strong as the anaesthetic effect of chocolate.

Well, if the Jewish newspaper's account had any accuracy in it, it's somehow based on animal studies showing a single acute trauma can alter stress responses permanently.

That circumcision is almost invariably carried out with analgesia now sits oddly with that start point.

And then something about correlation (not causation) between circumcision rates and diagnosed ASD rates (didn't say how many countries considered).

And mentioned some confounders which did not seem to have been considered.

That's why I was wondering if anyone had access to the actual paper.

Because the press reporting is already looking a bit off. And without seeing the actual papers (methods/results) it's not really possible to tell if that's just bad reporting, or if the paper itself is bad science.

Its not the natal analgesic exposure - that is as different, older study I think.

Non DM link to story uk.news.yahoo.com/circumcision-doubles-autism-risk-000507196.html

As I surmised the study suggests there is a link between the stress caused by the pain of circumcision:

"Given the widespread practice of non-therapeutic circumcision in infancy and childhood around the world, our findings should prompt other researchers to examine the possibility that circumcision trauma in infancy or early childhood might carry an increased risk of serious neurodevelopmental and psychological consequences."

When I can log into the studies database we have I'll look, it'll be tomorrow though now so someone may be able to find it before I.

That circumcision is almost invariably carried out with analgesia now sits oddly with that start point.

I think that analgesia only takes the edge off the pain? Can you imagine an adult agreeing to a foreskin removal with sugar water analgesia rather than a anaesthesia?

Research is in "Journal of Royal Society of Medicine"

And it's not a short sharp pain like a vaccination or ear piercing, either. The plastibell method commonly used in the US is basically pinching the skin until it dies. Fine in an umbilical cord which has no nerves - I wouldn't like it done anywhere else on my body.

I am extremely willing to believe that circumcision causes trauma which could have lifelong consequences but autism - really sceptical about that claim.

Do the boys in the USA still have this as routine?

Around 50%. But my friend who is American said it's not really 50%, most middle class white people do it and so there's still the fear your child will be a social outcast if you don't have it done.

A lot of insurance companies have stopped covering it as routine, some do, though.

(Lol look at me with my anecdata - obv sample size of one isn't representative. But I was surprised to hear this.)

Its barbaric and should be stopped until the child can decide for itself whether it wants its skin chopped off.

Wow I had no idea it was that popular

oh dear.

is it in the Daily Mail?

Newborn babies are not supposed to suffer the level of pain that chopping off a piece of their body would cause. Even if it is initially done with pain relief, presumably that would wear off and the injury would hurt during healing.

I've searched the database for that journal and cannot find this study