That's great to hear! Apparently they have done a bit of research on this and that's good.
Hypospadius causes the urinary opening to be anywhere from just off center of the tip of the penis to severe cases where it can even be below the scrotum. In cases where it is off center, the foreskin may be complete and the hypospadius would not even be noticeable until the foreskin retracts (or is forcibly stripped away during circumcision) In these minor cases, I believe it is best left alone as the cure can be worse than the problem given the vagarities of surgery and the possibility of unexpected outcomes. Most men who have these minor cases of hypospadius are quite content with their slight misformation and have no intent for any surgical intervention. I would consider any case where the opening is on the glans to be minor. However, it seems doctors are at the ready with their scapels and are mostly eager to correct even the most minor case with the recommendation that it be done at the earliest possible time.
Generally, the foreskin is used as raw donor material for the repair of hypospadious. The good thing is that there is a procedure developed in Scotland that does not use the foreskin at all and the results have been excellent, comparable to the procedure that uses the foreskin and eliminates the circumcision that accompanies the former method. The bad thing is that few doctors in the US are aware of this less invasive procedure and even when they are advised of it, seem reluctant to even investigate it much less try it. That only shows how hide bound and inflexible the American medical profession is.
In cases where the opening is on the glans and the foreskin is complete or mostly complete, I recommend that any hypospadius repair be posponed until the foreskin is retractile and the severity can be assessed without harm to the boy. At that time, it will be far less invasive and it will be fairly clear how it will affect him. If the opening is anywhere below the glans, in virtually all cases, there will be only a hooded foreskin over the top of the glans or no foreskin at all. In these cases, it will be clear what the extent of the deformity is from birth and in virtually all cases the foreskin will be non functional or marginally functional and repair as soon as reasonable is acceptable.
However, most often, the physician tries to check for hypospadius immediately after birth even when there is no outward evidence it exists and they usually do it by retracting for adherent foreskin. WRONG! If there is no outward evidence, there is no need to check for it until the foreskin is retractile. However, doctors who do this often issue dire warnings to parents that this condition can affect their son's ability to reproduce. The rationalization is that if the urinary opening is not at the tip, his semen can spill outside the vagina, preventing fertilization. Sure, this can be the case in severe cases but in minor cases, this is not legitimate as the opening will be close enough to the tip to deliver the semen inside the vagina.
The estrogen in the water supply not only originates from livestock farms but also from municipal water treatment plants upstream where estrogen from human use of birth control puts the estrogen in to the water supply and then it is taken in in the water supply of cities downstream. I have seen some fairly convincing statistical evidence that it is involved in several areas such as both male and female fertility and birth rates. It also appears that hypospadius and epispadius is also more common in cities that get this "downstream" water supply. The evidence is not conclusive but definitely interesting.
I have a theory that our increasing population will be self limiting for future population growth. That is, I don't think we have much worry about over populating the planet. I think as the population increases and we live in closer proximity to each other, certain limiting forces will kick in. For instance, natural disasters like the recent Indian Ocean tsunami will kill increasingly more people as the population increases. Epidemics such as HIV/AIDS, ebola and such will become far more common and will kill increasingly more people. The extreme measures to assure birth and survival of premature and defective/deformed babies will put far more defective genes in our gene pool increasing the numbers of babies that will not survive or reprodce and in an effort to limit family size, the water supply will have estrogen concentrations that will make conception more difficult and even those that want large families will have trouble conceiving those large families. I may be totally off base with my thinking but I see evidence of all of the elements lining up already.