Blatant misinformation on opinion page of the Wall Streeet Journal

[4chunut1]

A link to the opinion piece posted in the May 25 edition of the Wall Street Journal...  The article is by Diane Cole and is entitled "Circumcision Saved my Life."

 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304066504576343492869888506.html?KEYWORDS=circumcision#articleTabs%3Darticle

I find it astounding that a respected newspaper would print such an article with SO MUCH misinformation..!  I suspect the WSJ is trying to influence the vote in San Francisco this fall concerning the outlawing of circumcision prior to adulthood.  Many of the comments point out the egregious mistakes and beliefs concerning circumcision.  

[pigpokey]

Yeah, that was seriously messed up.  I wrote to the editors on that one.  You have to click to a second page to read the comments, so that's no protection from people believing that one.  I told them they might as well publish an opinion piece titled "Douching With Coke Saved Me From Being a Teen Mom."

[anne1140]

Wow, that is so dangerous. People who don't know better could read that and think, "I can have unprotected sex, because my partner is circumcised and won't transmit STDs to me." 

She may think circumcision saved her life, but this article could ruin many others.

And if her husband was a hemophiliac, how did he get circumcised in the first place without serious problems?

[philomom]

That is seriously messed up.

[Super~Single~Mama]

Originally Posted by anne1140 

And if her husband was a hemophiliac, how did he get circumcised in the first place without serious problems?

And this was MY question too!!  He probably almost died when he had the circ in the first place!

And really, condoms do a MUCH better job protecting both men AND women from the spread of HIV!  Her article clearly ignores the fact that women can pass the virus to men - and it probably has more to do with her being lucky that she didn't get the virus.  Or, she's one of the few people who don't have the proper receptor in their cells to receive the virus.

[brant31]

The author of the WSJ piece, Diane Cole, had her facts completely backwards, and the editors failed to fact-check.

To date, the only randomized controlled trial (RCT) to look at male-to-female HIV transmission and circumcision was halted early on ethical grounds because preliminary results showed up to a 54% higher risk of seroconverting among female partners of circumcised men. Simply put, this trial essentially negated any possible female-to-male benefits of male circumcision demonstrated in the 3 published RCTs on the subject.

The study was done in the Rakai region of Uganda. The lead researcher and author was Maria Wawer, wife of Dr. Ronald Gray of Johns Hopkins University, who was study designer of one of the three published RCTs. Dr Wawer is Canadian and Dr Gray is Australian; both are well-documented, outspoken proponents of male infant circumcision, even long before the studies were planned. Dr Wawer can be found in a YouTube interview laughing and pitying intact boys.

It was most unfortunate that the Journal chose to run this misleading piece.

[Mittsy]

Originally Posted by anne1140 

And if her husband was a hemophiliac, how did he get circumcised in the first place without serious problems?

It depends on what type of hemophilia he has. For example, DH has Factor XI Blood Clotting Disorder(Hemophilia C), he suffers from frequent and prolonged nosebleeds, if he has to get blood taken he will soak the gauze pad they put on and develop a nasty bruise, he tried to give blood and almost passed out.... And, that's about it, he has one of the least serious forms of Hemophilia.

You can get more info here if you're interested:

http://www.hemophilia.org/NHFWeb/MainPgs/MainNHF.aspx?menuid=54&contentid=54