The WHO recommendations advise an uptake in circumcision programs for countries that have low condom usage and high HIV rates. This recommendation, which was published several years ago, was aimed only at adults who practice high risk sexual behavior in sub-Saharan Africa. I am sure someone here will post the exact wording of the WHO statement, but you can also google it. I personally don't think this is a wise use of health resources nor does it make good public policy (this was purely a politically motivated decision on part of the WHO). However, the merits of these recommendations aside, this has nothing to do with kids raised in the USA in 2011. In short, the WHO does not recommend infant circumcision, not even in sub-Saharan Africa let alone for US infants, who are born and live in a totally different environment. The primary mode of HIV transmission in the USA is male to male, which circumcision does not protect against. In Africa, some studies suggest that circumcision offers a degree of efficacy in female to male HIV transmission, which is one of the main vectors of how HIV is spread in that part of the world. This makes up the scientific basis for the WHO statement, but the studies in question here are highly problematic, and as I said, the statement itself has a lot to do with the politics of AIDS in Africa. That notwithstanding, the statement that no national or international organization advises circumcision for infants remains correct. To back up this point, you might want to mention next time that several medical organizations (e.g.: Dutch, Australian) have updated their circumcision statements since the WHO recommendations came out, and surprise, surprise, none of them recommend infant circumcision. In fact, the Dutch medical organization strongly advises against it.Â
