Are intact boys more likely to get UTIs?

[Conifer]

When I told our family doctor that our newborn wasn't circumcised she said that I should watch for a fever without any other symptoms and that he might get a UTI...and if he gets them a lot, I should consider having him circumcised. Now I think my circ'ed DH is a little worried....like we should be waiting for this to happen. So.....are intact boys a lot more likely to get a UTI? Doesn't seem right to me.

[Fellow Traveler]

Originally Posted by Conifer

When I told our family doctor that our newborn wasn't circumcised she said that I should watch for a fever without any other symptoms and that he might get a UTI...and if he gets them a lot, I should consider having him circumcised. Now I think my circ'ed DH is a little worried....like we should be waiting for this to happen. So.....are intact boys a lot more likely to get a UTI? Doesn't seem right to me.

Not significantly. UTIs are more often caused by anomalies of the urinary tract and girls get UTIs at a far greater rate than boys (circumcised or intact). Here is a primer with a graph to give you an idea. I am intact and have never had a UTI nor have any other guys I know who are also intact.

http://www.circumstitions.com/Utis.html

ETA: I should add that UTIs are very rare in boys to begin with.

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

No they are not. Girls have a much higher chance of UTI yet we dont cut things off of them. The original study that came out with the false information compaired intact premature infants to circed full term infants. Since premature infants are more likely to get a UTI the study was invalid.

Here are some links on it
UTI myth: http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/UTI/
http://www.nocirc.org/statements/breastfeeding.php

In fact, UTI's are so rare in any case that, using Wiswell's data, 50 to 100 healthy boys would have to be circumcised in order to prevent a UTI from developing in only one patient. (Using more recent data from a better-controlled study, the number of unnecessary operations needed to prevent one hospital admission for UTI would jump to 195.

FORESKINS: Seek Elsewhere for Infants' Urinary Tract Infections
http://www.cirp.org/news/1997.12.22_PhysiciansWeekly/


UTI Neonatal circumcision revisited
http://www.cps.ca/english/statements...ION%20OF%20UTI

The incidence of Geniturinary abnormalities in circumcised and uncircumcised presenting with an initial urinary tract infection by 6 months of age
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/UTI/mueller/

Is this the Dr. who will be seeing your ds? If so then you must be vigilant about protecting him from retraction. Since this Dr. appears to be like most in the US. who are ignorant of proper intact anatomy care. There is no reason they need to even touch his penis other than moving it out of the way to check the testicles. Harm can be done if it happens so best to just prevent it.

[RiverSky]

Well, UTI's are simply treated and only 1-2% of intact boys get them, and the number is only about 1% more than circumcised boys. In contrast, a higher percentage of girls get them and often, cranberry juice is suggested as a treatment. So...does that make it sound like surgery is warranted?

And just to add to this, my almost 11 year old intact boy has never had a UTI and we have never retracted (neither has he, by the way) him at all, or does anything besides simple baths and showers.

Hope that makes you feel a bit better about it.

[Conifer]

Thanks

I was pretty sure about the not retracting thing before he was born so I was glad to hear my doctor agree with that. She has no intention of retracting his penis. She only tried to warn me about infections and (gulp) cancer implications. I am not really worried about this, but I think I need to reassure my DH. Neither of us knows anyone that is intact or has children that are intact. I just didn't see the point in having our perfectly healthy baby go into surgery. I just want to hug him all day not give him pain killers for a sore penis...ouch!

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

Cancer
Cancer Society:[url]http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_2X_Can_penile_cancer_be_prevented_35.asp[/url]

In the past, circumcision has been suggested as a way to prevent penile cancer. This suggestion was based on studies that reported much lower penile cancer rates among circumcised men than among uncircumcised men. However, most researchers now believe those studies were flawed because they failed to consider other factors that are now known to affect penile cancer risk.

http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/cancer/

Gellis (1978) said there are more deaths from circumcision than from cancer of the penis.8

Boczko et al . found numerous reports of penile cancer in circumcised men, thus conclusively disproving Wolbarst's false claims of protection from penile cancer by circumcision.9
In "Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy," Edward Wallerstein writes14: "If infant circumcision reduces penile cancer we could expect to see proportionately less penile cancer in circumcising nations as compared to non-circumcising ones. No such difference is found."

Preston established quite clearly that there was little evidence to support a relationship between lack of circumcision and penile cancer, cervical cancer, or cancer of the prostate in 1970 but he was unable to identify the causative agent at that time,6 while Leitch did the same in Australia.

[Fellow Traveler]

Originally Posted by Conifer

Thanks

I was pretty sure about the not retracting thing before he was born so I was glad to hear my doctor agree with that. She has no intention of retracting his penis. She only tried to warn me about infections and (gulp) cancer implications. I am not really worried about this, but I think I need to reassure my DH. Neither of us knows anyone that is intact or has children that are intact. I just didn't see the point in having our perfectly healthy baby go into surgery. I just want to hug him all day not give him pain killers for a sore penis...ouch!

Cancer. Oh boy. Penile cancer is the rarest cancer in men. You should let her know that.

[glongley]

Putting worries about penile cancer into your head is big time overkill on this doctor's part. Men are more likely to get cancer of the breast than penile cancer. And the national rates of cancer are the same in Europe (which doesn't circumcise) as in the US (which does).

Here's another piece of ammunition on the UTI business.

See: Van Howe RS. Effect of confounding in the association between circumcision status and urinary tract infection.J Infect. 2005 Jul;51(1):59-68.

The study models attempts to estimate the impact of confounding in the association between circumcision status and urinary tract infection from epidemiological factors, sample collection, and health-seeking behaviors (of Hispanics and parents of premature infants) in the first year of life.

Assuming that the actual incidence of UTI is no different between circed and intact boys, the factors included in the model could account for urinary tract infection being diagnosed 4.27 times more frequently in intact males under a year of age.

AUTHOR'S CONCLUSIONS: Previously reported differences in the rate of urinary tract infection by circumcision status could be entirely due to sampling and selection bias. Until clinical studies adequately control for sources of bias, circumcision should not be recommended as a preventive for urinary tract infection.

---

That doc does not sound very educated about the intact penis or very supportive of not circumcising - either that of they are just brainwashed and in need of some education. I'd give them some feedback about your perception of their advice, and have a low threshold for seeking another, more foreskin-friendly physician.

Gillian

[SlackerDad]

Congrats on your intact baby boy!

I am an intact, forty year old man (and the father of an intact nine year old boy). Neither of us have had any problems.

Something that seems to be sort of my specialty on this board is to point out that at least from my POV, what he would be missing out on as an adult is an even bigger deal than the pain circumcision would cause him as a baby. This is probably not something your DH would really want to dwell on, but really--trust me: the equipment works much better in its natural uncut state!

Thank you for not having part of your son's penis cut off. He will be grateful later in life when he realises the bullet he dodged.