Cloth diapers and circumcision

[bugmenot]

I was talking to a momma today who I've known for over 10 years. She has a daughter who is married and who should have been out of college for a couple years now, but took another career path after HS and didn't go to college. Her youngest, a son, just started his third year of college a couple months ago.

Anyway, the daughter was cloth diapered.

The son was disposable diaper, but the momma was disappointed to have to do this. She said he got bad rashes.

After she told me (a few mins ago), about the son's diaper situation, I remember she mentioned he was circumcised. I looked into it, and there appears to be a link between cloth diapers, rashes, and circumcised penises.

Is it just a random occurrence, or is there a true link?

[heatherdeg]

That ought to be interesting...

[QueenOfTheMeadow]

I've never heard that before.  Is there a study or is this anecdotal?  From what my mom said, I had horrible rashes with cloth diapers, but my other two sisters had none. 

[MichelleZB]

What would be the reason for cloth diapers causing more rashes on circumcised but not intact boy's bums? It doesn't make sense to me.

My son, incidentally, is cloth diapered and intact. He gets very few rashes, though he does get them every once in awhile and we get rid of them quickly by letting him chill out diaperless for a day or two.

[WaitingForKiddos]

My daughter (intact) gets miserable rashes, poor girl. My son (intact) does not. I'd guess it's just the kiddo's individual sensitivity. 

[Treece]

Sounds anecdotal, and I can't find anything about it through a cursory search. My first thought on this is that after circumcision, keritnazation begins. Maybe cloth diapers rub the area more than disposables. However, since circumcision is ages old, even in the US being culturally present over 100 years, there have always been circumcised boys in cloth. And at some points in history, and perhaps places on Earth today, there are cut little girls in cloth :'( It's all so sad to me, really.

[mama24-7]

Originally Posted by WaitingForKiddos 

My daughter (intact) gets miserable rashes, poor girl. My son (intact) does not. I'd guess it's just the kiddo's individual sensitivity. 

OT: have you considered elimination communication?  There's an area here on MDC about it.  Diaper rash was the reason I started it w/ my second child.

Best wishes,

Sus

[Mitchell756]

The scar tissue that replaces the foreskin following surgical amputation is much more sensitive to abrasions then the outer layer of the foreskin is. It is no different than any other scar on the body. If you have a scar than you are likely aware that it is more sensitive than the normal tissue around, this scar just happens to be on the penis. There may be a link between increased rashes and irritation around the scar and the type of covering used. Certainly the glans of an infant is going to be very sensitive to pain and abrasion, that is why it the foreskin does not retract until many years later. I am not aware of any particular studies in regards to this matter, but i am aware that attempting to compromise or change evolution is going to have very many deleterious effects on an individual.

[bugmenot]

Update and I kind of forgot about this thread!

Anyway, the mom worked in pediatrics "back in the day" (I'm guessing 70s and/or 80s) and said a lot of babies had diaper rashes. (I didn't ask how many were circ.) Whoever said it could be "individual sensitivities" could be right.

[WaitingForKiddos]

Originally Posted by mama24-7 

OT: have you considered elimination communication?  There's an area here on MDC about it.  Diaper rash was the reason I started it w/ my second child.

Best wishes,

Sus

You know, I have! I did EC part time with my son! I should stop thinking of doing it with her and DO IT! 

I did have a huge breakthrough since my post. My diapers had a big ammonia buildup and on top of that I figured out that DD's rash was yeast. I stripped the diapers and used GV on DD. CURED!