E-Mail 'Saving Them the Pain of a Later Circumcision' To A Friend Email a copy of 'Saving Them the Pain of a Later Circumcision' to a friend * Required Field Your Name: * Your E-Mail: * Your Remark: Friend's Name: * Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries. Friend's E-Mail: * Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries. Image Verification: * Loading ... 7 Responses to Saving Them the Pain of a Later Circumcision June Park JuneParkIntactivistPark July 6, 2012 at 9:32 am Thank you! I could not have said it better myself.:)P.S. I do know men who hate certain people and do not know why, then it turns out the person held them during the bris or was in the room when they were circumcised so I think they remember on a very basic level if nothing else. Kelly July 7, 2012 at 9:15 am This article seems to be just an opinion without a lot of facts. And since I can’t look at the study you cited, I’m not sure exactly what the situations were. Take a look at information on the benefits of circumcision. If a circumcision is done by a trained person on or around the 8th day (that’s when vitamin k comes in), any complications should not include death. Here’s just one article that I found that gives a good overview. By the way it points out that babies die from UTI due to not being circumcised. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1717326/pdf/v077p00258.pdf Mandy July 8, 2012 at 12:26 pm I have looked at information in favor of circumcision. Prior to having children, my husband and I extensively researched the topic (along with many other topics), digging into actual medical journals and looking at data and information. The fact is that no health organization in the world recommends routine infant circumcision. While studies do indicate a higher incidence of UTIs in intact males vs. circumcised males under the age of 3 months and a slight rise in infants between ages 3-8 months, it only amount s to an absolute risk increase of 1% increase, with many studies showing an even lower increase. Studies in older males show that proper hygiene, something I would hope everyone wants for any child of theirs, significantly reduce the risk of UTIs. Studies on the incidence of UTIs in intact versus circumcised females also show a higher incidence of UTIs in intact females versus their circumcised counterparts. Despite the fact that females have a much higher incidence of UTIs than males, routine infant circumcision of females is not recommended and is in fact illegal in the United States. UTIs in girls are treated as an infection, as they are treated in males in most other parts of the world. There are many surgical procedures which could prevent problems. Routine removal of the appendix at birth would prevent a person from later having appendicitis. Removal of breast buds and tissue would prevent possible breast cancers, which has a much higher rate – resulting in almots 30% of all cancers in American women. We don’t do these things, though. We treat disease or conditions when they occur rather than removing healthy tissue at birth. Kelly August 27, 2012 at 11:26 am http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/08/22/peds.2012-1989.abstract “Systematic evaluation of English-language peer-reviewed literature from 1995 through 2010 indicates that preventive health benefits of elective circumcision of male newborns outweigh the risks of the procedure. Benefits include significant reductions in the risk of urinary tract infection in the first year of life and, subsequently, in the risk of heterosexual acquisition of HIV and the transmission of other sexually transmitted infections. The procedure is well tolerated when performed by trained professionals under sterile conditions with appropriate pain management. Complications are infrequent; most are minor, and severe complications are rare. Male circumcision performed during the newborn period has considerably lower complication rates than when performed later in life.” Dionna codenamemama August 27, 2012 at 11:50 am From http://www.drmomma.org/2012/08/aap-circumcision-policy-statement.html: The Abstract states on page 585 that “health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns . . . . The 1999 Statement studied 40 years’ worth of research, and the 2012 studied only selective research since 1999. Only 1031 of 1388 studies were accepted to look at. Balance might have been found in the 357 studies that were omitted, but the AAP was not seeking balance. The AAP statement goes on ad nauseum about alleged “benefits”, to the point of fear-mongering that something will go wrong if an infant isn’t circumcised. It’s a high pressure sales pitch to try to get the American public to buy the circumcisions that AAP and ACOG doctors are selling. This is in direct contrast to Europe, where circumcision is uncommon and the health of European children equals or surpasses that of American children. No studies on the anatomy and functions of the foreskin were included. This is surprising, since it would seem like common sense to consider what the functions of any healthy body part are before amputating it. In contrast to the AAP, the American Association of Family Physicians (AAFP) has stated: “…the association between having a sexually transmitted disease (STD) – excluding human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and being circumcised are inconclusive… most of the studies [of the effect of circumcision on HIV] …have been conducted in developing countries, particularly those in Africa. Because of the challenges with maintaining good hygiene and access to condoms, these results are probably not generalizable to the U.S. population”.” From http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/pdf/2012-08-26A_Commentary.pdf: The task force asserts that current evidence that the health benefits of male circumcision outweigh the risks, but has failed to produce any sort of analysis to support that conclusion. Previously available cost-benefit studies do not support that conclusion…. Recent evidence shows higher rates of HIV infection among circumcised men as compared to non-circumcised men in numerous population groups, however the task force did not choose to report this information. The 2012 task force, in its zeal to promote male circumcision, has resurrected the UTI myth, which was partially debunked by the 1999 task force.31 Furthermore, Chessare (1992) showed, even if the claims about UTI were correct, that the complications from circumcision exceed the benefits from prevention of UTI. The AAP has been concerned about state Medicaid agencies stopping payment for unnecessary circumcision because its doctors get less money. The protection of the source of the money is so important to the AAP that a section on financing newborn circumcision by third-party payers has been included in this so-called medical position statement.” Katrina September 21, 2012 at 12:46 pm Even *if* it lowered the risk (cannot PREVENT any of these things), it is unethical to perform this procedure on an unconsenting minor who is not allowed adequate pain medication (during or after). It is unethical, period, because it is violating the individual rights and freedoms of another person by FORCING an unnecessary cosmetic procedure on someone else without their consent. It is that simple. It *might* lower risk in third world countries, but it does NOT in developed nations. The HIV African studies are also done on consenting adults, NOT the routine procedure on infants. So to compare those studies with routine infant circumcision is completely and absolutely irrelevent. Also, there are recent studies that show the exact opposite effect of circumcision and HIV rates. So, to say that it lowers the risk for certain, is not an accurate assumption. Like mentioned, the risk of UTI in women is significantly higher than in men. The perscription should be the same. The personal rights and well-being of both sexes should equally be protected. Jessica P. TheSuperVegan July 7, 2012 at 4:42 pm I’ve never understood how circumcision is such a popular thing. How does mutilating your own child sound like a good idea??