or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tennisdude23

The researchers of the African trials authored a number of other studies in addition to the RCTs.  However, the data for these studies was taken from the RCT to booster claims that circ. has an effect on syphilis, HPV, sexual pleasure etc.  The point is they just rehashed the same old data and called it new research, which it really was not.  Hope this helps.  There were no significant new findings in the AAP report regarding UTIs, penile cancer, etc.  So, this really...
Best take so far I think is written by Brian Earp, a research fellow at Oxford and a Yale grad. Check out his blog here and spread it far and wide: http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2012/08/the-aap-report-on-circumcision-bad-science-bad-ethics-bad-medicine/   My view of this is that the AAP statement is not about aggressively pushing the procedure.  After all, theirs is "slight benefits vs. slight risk calculus.  But the statement was most certainly influenced by...
Azzeps, in the statement itself, right after the benefits v. risks part, they specifically state that they do not recommend routine circumcision for all boys because the benefits are not great enough.  This is taken directly from the statement, which is what I wanted to clarify on this thread.  They call circumcision an elective procedure (meaning not necessary) and they suggest that there might be some (pretty small) benefits to circumcision which combined exceed the...
Hello all, I have not been here in a long time, but I saw this thread while googling the recent AAP statement.  Since a lot of posters on here are having kids or know people who are having kids, I just wanted to clarify that the AAP still DOES NOT recommend routine infant circumcision.  While their statement does say that the potential benefits of circumcision may outweigh its acute risks (bleeding, infection), the decision rests fully with the parents to make a final...
As long as it is allowed, I think you have a pretty neat idea.  You never know, but you might just make someone think twice about circumcision. 
There is no evidence to the claim that forced premature retraction took place or was going to take place based on what was stated in this thread.  I can say this because you yourself admit that you, I, and health care providers can have different definitions of retraction, keeping in mind that you provided no specific instructions to your doctor other than saying "no retraction," which you admit is open to interpretation.  So, yes, I stick by my judgment call that you...
  Not to beat a dead horse, but having established that there is no single definition for retraction, what should have been said is "hands off," because the very word, retraction, is open to interpretation.  I only say this because the word retraction is thrown around this board, but no explanation is given, especially for new parents/posters.       My point is that you concede that medical personnel can interpret the word retraction in multiple ways.  As such, you could...
You are right on this point, which is why I and some 20+ posters don't understand why you phrased your letters the way you did and why you have been pursuing this case against your doctor, stating a malicious accusation that she provides dangerous care, which I really hope stays confined to you and this board.  
Peron is giving perfect advice.  I also absolutely agree that the foreskin should not be tempered with because all you have to do is leave it alone.  The problem is that when physician touches the penis (e.g.: to visualize the urethra), he/she may slightly push back the foreskin.  That in my book is not tampering, retracting, whatever you might want to call it.  If you, however, feel that this does constitute tampering, then you have a right to say no to the examination...
Then what should be advocated on this board is a "hands off" policy, not a "non-retraction" policy because those two are very different.  Clearly, there is no specific definition of retraction and new posters on this board should be informed of this.  In all honestly, if definitions are going to be thrown around, they should come from physician's associations, not from posters using the dictionary.  I also don't buy the notion that many doctors are necessarily ignorant...
New Posts  All Forums: