General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Circumcision as abuse

Started by Nahasafeemapete · · Last activity · 26 posts · 3,263 views

← Back to General fitness, health and nutrition

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postCircumcision as abuseNahasafeemapete · 1 Apr 2004 02 / This pagePosts 21–26Page 2 of 2 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #27Neal · 8 Apr 2004

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
1 April 2004
Last activity
8 April 2004
Original author
Nahasafeemapete
Posts
26
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
3,263
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–26 of 26
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Clisby
    Archived post
    #22
    Coleah said:

    From the perspective of an observant old grandma......
    I've seen the benefits of circumcision for little boys
    through the years. When they are babies it is much easier
    to keep them clean.

    How could it possibly be easier? You don't do anything
    special with a baby's uncirc'ed penis - just wash it off. I
    hope you're not suggesting that you have to retract the
    foreskin to clean it - that can injure a baby, since the
    foreskin isn't likely to be retractable that that age.

    Clisby

    Report
  2. Dave {Reply Add
    Archived post
    #23
    In message said:
    Coleah said:

    From the perspective of an observant old grandma......
    I've seen the benefits of circumcision for little boys
    through the years. When they are babies it is much easier
    to keep them clean.

    How could it possibly be easier? You don't do anything
    special with a baby's uncirc'ed penis - just wash it off.
    I hope you're not suggesting that you have to retract the
    foreskin to clean it - that can injure a baby, since the
    foreskin isn't likely to be retractable that that age.


    One has to suspect that most of the issues with an intact
    penis are due to the foreskin being forcibly retracted
    before it's ready. We have no trouble keeping our son clean,
    as is common in Europe where proper care of foreskins is a
    matter of routine.

    Dave
    --
    mail: da [email hidden] (without the space)
    llondel.orgllondel.org So many gadgets, so little time...

    Report
  3. Dave {Reply Add
    Archived post
    #24

    In message <[email hidden]>, Neal

    nealUNDERSCOREsmithATrocketmailDOTcom said:


    From their data, you would have to circumcise 100 boys to
    prevent 3.7 UTIs, and then one of the circumcised boys
    would get a UTI anyway.


    You missed the stats on botched circumcisions. How many of
    that 100 would have adhesions, too much skin removed,
    asymmetric removal, etc.

    Dave
    --
    mail: da [email hidden] (without the space)
    llondel.orgllondel.org So many gadgets, so little time...

    Report
  4. Coleah
    Archived post
    #25

    "Neal" <nealUNDERSCOREsmithATrocketmailDOTcom> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...
    my.webmd.com3606 1460

    Quoted message said:

    Try to find a less biased site next time. And do a long
    search, not a brief one.
    --
    Neal

    ----------------------------------------------------
    Well I searched and searched and searched !! Found a few 'contra-
    theory websites' (at the bottom of the list) that poo-pooed
    the scientific study in the New England Journal of Medicine.

    *****************************************
    * Does circumcision reduce the risk of penile human
    * papillomavirus (HPV) infection in a man
    * and cervical cancer in his female partner?
    *****************************************

    medicirc.comcervical
    cancer/more_info_cervical_cancer.html In recent years the
    role of human papilloma virus (HPV) in both penile and
    cervical cancer has been proven, and these cancers are now
    being thought of

    bhadt.combenefitscircum.htm

    behavior were two to five times more likely to develop
    cervical cancer. This high rate of cancer was almost
    certainly caused by the high rate of HPV infection in
    these men.

    ashastd.org042902.html Among the research
    findings hitting the press in recent weeks: Long-term oral
    contraceptive use has been shown to elevate the risk of
    cervical cancer fourfold; and Women with uncircumcised male
    partners may be more likely to develop cervical cancer.

    jpost.comNews.46892.ht
    ml Circumcision found to reduce cervical cancer in partners

    biomed.lib.umn.edu20020411 hpv.html
    Study: Circumcised men less likely to transmit virus that
    causes cervical cancer

    bitmed.med.uchile.cl704185
    circumcised men were less likely than uncircumcised men to
    have HPV infection (odds ratio, 0.37; 95 percent confidence
    interval, 0.16 to 0.85).

    womens-health.jwatch.org1
    Comment: These findings show that circumcision is associated
    with a lowered risk for penile HPV infection.

    stopgettingsick.comcondition templat
    e.cfm/5338/83/1 Circumcised Men Less Likely to Get Virus
    Which Causes Cancer in Women

    healthylife.com221cutyo.htm
    Cut Your Risk of Cervical Cancer

    detnews.coma05 462536.htm

    futuretalk.org04111985.html
    Circumcision cuts cervical cancer rates

    intelihealth.com3
    48499.html However, he said circumcision could make a big
    difference in developing countries where there is no regular
    screening for cervical cancer.

    ch.yahoo.com/search?va=cervical+cancer+uncircumcised&ei=UTF-
    8&n=20&fl=0&xargs=&fr=fp-tab-web-t&b=41 National Cervical
    Cancer Coalition Foreskins, Cervix Cancer Linked

    faculty.washington.educervical.htm
    CERVICAL NEOPLASIA

    case-control studies

    dmacgroup.comcircumcision.htm dMAC Asia
    Insurance Review Male Circumcision is Found to Reduce
    Cervical Cancer

    usatoday.com2002 04 11
    cervical.htm Circumcision lowers risk of cervical cancer

    ima.org.ilar03feb 11.pdf Low incidence of
    cervical cancer in Jewish women: Has the puzzle finally
    been solved?

    africast.comhealth article.php

    cancer, scientists have found. They also suggest men
    themselves are less likely to develop genital warts.

    docguide.com8525697700573
    E1885256B980048A15B Uncircumcised Men Raise Partners'
    Cervical Cancer Risk

    content.nejm.org1105 New
    England Journal of Medicine Conclusions: Male circumcision
    is associated with a reduced risk of penile

    partners, a reduced risk of cervical cancer in their current
    female partners.

    hepatitisandhiv.com041202c.html
    Circumcision Reduces Risk of Penile HPV Infection, Cervical
    Cancer in Partners

    everybody.co.nzinfect circum.htm New
    Zealand Health Board Male circumcision and reduced cervical
    cancer risk

    cancerq.com00000011.htm HIV AND CANCER

    personalmd.comn0411075515.shtml Foreskins,
    Cervix Cancer Linked

    metromedicine.commedicaltopicsinthenewspast.html
    Circumcised men less likely to get virus which causes cancer
    in women (APApril 11): A study published in the New England
    Journal of Medicine showed that women

    Cervical cancer is related to the presence of the human
    papillomavirus which may be carried more easily in the
    foreskins of uncircumcised men.

    miami.com3038951.htm The
    Miami Herald

    bupa.co.uk1
    10402cancer.html British United Provident Association
    Circumcision reduces risk of cervical cancer

    sfgate.comcgi
    bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/04/11/MN173770.DTL
    Circumcision hinders cervical cancer, study finds

    cirp.orgaitken swan1
    Support for the circumcision hypothesis is found in the
    lower frequency of cancer of the cervix in other
    populations who practice circumcision when compared with
    populations who do not.

    planetaislam.combenefits of circumcisi
    on.html In a study of 5000 cervical and 300 penile cancer
    cases in Madras between 1982 and 1990 the incidence was low
    amongst Muslim women, when compared with Hindu and
    Christian, and was not seen at all in Muslim men [22] . In a

    uncircumcised men or those circumcised after the age of 1
    year was reported in 1993 to be associated with a 4-fold
    higher risk of cervical cancer, after controlling for
    factors such as age, age of first intercourse and education.

    zawaj.combenefits circum.html Cervical
    cancer in female partners of uncircumcised men

    canoe.ca10 circumcision cp.html

    cervical cancer, according to a large international study

    highbeam.comdoc0.asp
    &refid=ink_overture_ref_news

    oncolink.comarticle.cfm
    d=8226 There also seems to be slightly increased risk of
    developing cervical cancer

    circumcisioninfo.combbc cancer.htm Circumcision
    'curbs cervical cancer risk'

    cancerpage.comcancernews4192.htm
    Man's Circumcision May Cut Partner's Cancer Risk

    newscientist.comnews.jsp
    Circumcision cuts cervical cancer rates

    my.webmd.com3606 1460
    tomi&condition=News_and_Events Circumcision Protects
    Female Partner

    themodernreligion.comcircumcision.htm A
    number of studies have documented higher rates of cervical
    cancer in women

    state.nj.usjan04ce
    rvical.pdf Center For Health Statistics Risk factors:
    Intercourse at early age, multiple partners, intercourse
    with an uncircumcised male.

    cfpc.cavol49 sep critical 1.asp
    Circumcision is associated with reduced risk of cervical
    cancer in women

    usfca.edufac
    staff/maagm/PPSlides/lect_5sp00/tsld023.htm less related
    factors: uncircumcised male partners

    bio.miami.eduMaleCircumcisionfoundlinked
    toFemaleCervicalCancer.html Male Circumcision Is Found to
    Reduce Cervical Cancer

    abc.net.aus586954.htm A new
    study in the New England Journal of Medicine says women have
    an increased risk of cervical cancer if their partners are
    not circumcised. Why? It seems uncircumcised men are more
    likely to transmit human papilloma virus (HPV) and,
    worldwide, HPV is the cause of 99 per cent of cervical
    cancers in women.

    dermatology.jwatch.org1
    jkey=744tmQnqQFz5k&keytype=ref&siteid=jnlwatch Male
    Circumcision and Female Cervical Cancer

    smh.com.au1018333399263.html
    Uncircumcised men linked to cancer risk in female partners

    aafp.org8.html American Family
    Physician Does Male Circumcision Prevent Cervical Cancer in
    Women? The authors conclude that circumcision is associated
    with a lower rate of penile HPV infection and a reduced risk
    of cervical cancer in female partners of men with higher
    numbers of lifetime partners.

    malaya.com.phlivi2.htm Women who are at
    high risk of developing cervical cancer are those who

    those with HIV, those with male partners who are highly
    promiscuous, uncircumcised, with penile or prostatic cancer,
    or previously married to a woman with cervical cancer.

    augustachronicle.comtec LA0411
    1.shtml Circumcised men less likely to carry deadly virus

    rho.orgcxca b 02.html Primary prevention of
    cervical cancer Castellsague, X. et al. Male circumcision,
    penile human papillomavirus infection, and cervical cancer
    in female partners. New England Journal of Medicine 346(15):1105-
    1112 (2002).

    pcrm.orgpcrm.org
    med_soc_curr_3.html The human papilloma virus, believed to
    contribute to cervical cancer, is found more often in
    uncircumcised men.

    saremhospital.comCervical%20Cancer.htm There
    also seems to be slightly increased risk of developing
    cervical cancer

    nocirc.orgcps.html Overall, no
    specific cause-and-effect relation between exposure to

    mothersagainstcirc.orgmed argu.htm It has been
    suggested that circumcision prevents cancer of the penis and
    of the uterine cervix.

    Report
  5. Alexander Vasse
    Archived post
    #26

    [email hidden] (Johanne) wrote in message

    Yes I was traumatized when I had my nails clipped.

    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    How can it be anything other than abuse? The physical
    mutilation, the severe emotional and mental stress the
    child is placed under, are all quite clearly a disturbing
    form of abuse.

    If the child's health/life depended on it, then it would
    be understandable.

    What would you call it if someone came up to you and
    briefly informed you (if they even bothered!) that they
    were going to cut a part of you away from yourself?
    Because THEY had decided it would be best for you. I cant
    imagine what a child must feel as all this is going on,
    strangers cutting away at his body, removing a part of who
    he is, whilst mummy and/or daddy are standing there
    watching? How messed up is that?

    That leads to the very good point you raise that this
    could well then lead that child to grow up more
    aggressively as a form of protection and prevention of
    that happening again.

    Then the emotional issues for later on in life....it's
    truly appalling.

    Johanne-

    Report
  6. Neal
    Archived post
    #27

    On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 04:47:26 GMT, "Coleah" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    "Neal" <nealUNDERSCOREsmithATrocketmailDOTcom> wrote in
    message "]news:[email hidden]...
    my.webmd.com3606 1460
    mi&condition=News_and_Events

    Quoted message said:

    Try to find a less biased site next time. And do a long
    search, not a brief one.
    --
    Neal

    ----------------------------------------------------
    Well I searched and searched and searched !! Found a few
    'contra-theory websites' (at the bottom of the list) that
    poo-pooed the scientific study in the New England Journal
    of Medicine.

    But you found mostly web sites reporting on the 2002 NEJM,
    repeating what they had read, but offering nothing new. The
    few others I have NOT snipped out below.

    Quoted message said:

    content.nejm.org1105

    The abstract of the report itself:

    Quoted message said:

    New England Journal of Medicine Conclusions: Male
    circumcision is associated with a reduced risk of penile

    Quoted message said:

    partners, a reduced risk of cervical cancer in their
    current female partners.

    This goes against the previous studies. There was a study
    done in the US in about 1948, surveying women hospitalized
    for cervical cancer against all other women hospitalized at
    the same time. As published, it seemed to show that
    circumcision protected a woman from cancer. But as soon as
    it was published, the methodology was challenged. The
    circumcision status of the men had been established by
    asking their wives. They were forced to go back, find the
    women, find their husbands, and ascertain the true
    circumcision status of the husbands. (Remember, this was the
    late 40s). Correcting the data, there was no correlation
    between cervical cancer and lack of circumcision. But the
    original publication had been made, and you still find pre-
    2002 references like "there are reports that circumcision
    prevents cervical cancer."

    Back to the 2002 study.

    How much reduced? If it is much (if any), have you ever
    wondered why no one has ever noticed a difference in
    cervical cancer rates between say Germany (circumcision
    approximately less than 10%) or France (about the same)
    and the US (circumcision rate of adult males about 70%
    or greater). You would think someone would notice,
    wouldn't you?

    Let's go for a moment to Uganda, where the famous "Ugandan
    Truckers Study" was done. This study purported to find that
    being uncircumcised increased the chance of getting HIV by
    about 3.3. This was cited as evidence that circumcision
    prevented AIDS. I go to this study because it was one of the
    few that gathered data on religion. No one talks about it,
    but the portion of the population that was not Christian or
    Muslim had about a 3.8 greater chance of becoming HIV
    positive. Now that is a striking finding. Of course all the
    Muslim men were circumcised. Virtually all the circumcised
    men in Uganda are Muslim.

    Note that both the Christian and Muslim religions teach
    faithfulness to one's spouse. In addition, Muslims are
    particularly fastidious

    Think these things might have had something to do about the
    3.8 to one ratio?

    Back to Spain, where the 2002 NEJM study was done. It was a
    meta study, combining data from five countries: Spain,
    Colombia, Brazil, Thailand, and the Philippines.

    Virtually no one in Columbia or Brazil is circumcised. In
    Spain and Thailand, about the only men who are circumcised
    are Muslim. Circumcision exists outside the Muslim community
    in the Philippines, but still the majority of circumcised
    men are Muslim.

    Do you start to see a connection?

    I don't think the 2002 Spanish study will stand.

    The few links that were not reporting the results of the
    NEJM article: ...

    Quoted message said:

    medicirc.comcervical
    cancer/more_info_cervical_cancer.html

    Dr. Schoen's site.

    ...

    Quoted message said:

    planetaislam.combenefits of circumci
    sion.html

    Brian Morris' site

    ...

    Quoted message said:

    zawaj.combenefits circum.html

    Brian Morris again ...

    Quoted message said:

    themodernreligion.comcircumcision.htm

    Brian Morris again ...

    Quoted message said:

    state.nj.usjan04c
    ervical.pdf

    No cite given.. Bald statement ...

    Quoted message said:

    usfca.edufac
    staff/maagm/PPSlides/lect_5sp00/tsld023.htm

    No cite given. Bald statement ...

    Quoted message said:

    abc.net.aus586954.htm

    reports the NEJM article, implies that Brian Morris is an
    MD.

    ... familydoctor.orgx2276.xml does not recommend
    circumcision ...

    Quoted message said:

    pcrm.orgMedicine and Society Curriculum
    /med_soc_curr_3.html

    References footnote 2, which reads: 2. Anonymous. Fact sheet
    for physicians regarding neonatal circumcision. Am Fam
    Physician 1995;52(2):523-6.

    This is no longer found on their web site.

    Quoted message said:

    nocirc.orgcps.html

    Overall, no specific cause-and-effect relation between
    exposure to

    established.80 ...

    Quoted message said:

    mothersagainstcirc.orgmed argu.htm It has been
    suggested that circumcision prevents cancer of the penis
    and of the uterine cervix.

    Yes, they did say that, but it was in this context:

    " The foreskin does not cause penile cancer. In a letter to
    the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Cancer
    Society stated that it "does not consider routine
    circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent
    [penile or cervical] cancers. ...Penile cancer rates in
    countries which do not practice circumcision are lower than
    those found in the U.S." Penile cancer occurs at the rate of
    1 in 100,000 males in the U.S. circumcised or not.

    Risk factors for penile and cervical cancer are the presence
    of the human papilloma virus and smoking. The HPV virus is
    found in both circumcised and uncircumcised men. "Portraying
    routine circumcision as an effective means of prevention
    distracts the public from the task of avoiding the behaviors
    proven to contribute to penile and cervical

    with multiple partners. Perpetuating the mistaken belief
    that circumcision prevents cancer is inappropriate." ...

    "It has been suggested that circumcision prevents cancer of
    the penis and of the uterine cervix. Both kinds of cancer
    are associated with genital infection with specific types of
    human papillamoviruses. It has been alleged that cancer of
    the penis is virtually unknown among men circumcised in
    infancy. However penile carcinomas have in fact been
    reported among circumcised men. The incidence of cancer of
    the penis in the United States, where most men have been
    circumcised at birth, is reported to be between 0 and 2.1
    per 100,000, representing less than 1 percent of all cancers
    in men. This incidence of penile cancer is similar to the
    rates in Denmark (1.1 per 100,0000 and Japan (0.3 per
    100,0000 where neonatal circumcision is not routinely
    performed. One study, reporting contradictory data, claimed
    that the lifetime risk in American men is 1 in 600. This
    estimate was extrapolated from a study of the incidence of
    male circumcision and depended on three incorrect
    assumptions: that all penile carcinomas occur in men who are
    not circumcised at birth, that the circumcision rate between
    1890 and 1905 was the same as that in 1959, and that men
    presenting at a cancer detection center in Los Angeles, 40
    percent of whom were classified as professionals or
    managers, were representative of the U.S. male population.
    Thus the lifetime risk of cancer reported in this study is
    probably incorrect. The evidence that penile cancer has a
    viral cause and the disease's similar incidence rates in
    countries with very different rates of circumcision cast
    doubt on the proposition that circumcision is the most
    effective way to prevent cancer of the penis." THE QUESTION
    OF ROUTINE NEONATAL CIRCUMCISION, by Ronald L. Poland, M.
    D., THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, Vol. 322, No. 18
    (May 3, 1990), Pages 1312-1315.

    --
    Neal

    Note: To contact, unmunge and remove the "@giganews.com"
    from the address

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionGeneral fitness, health and nutrition Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.