Response to generic problems in the foreskin list. (usable argument for intactivists)

[perspective]

Took this off a message board, it was a response to a pro circer who gave one of those long lists of "problems" boys will have if they keep their foreskins, the list was part of the users response.

I thought this might be useful for people here, seeing as they might be able to use it in a bare bones circ argument with family or something because all the points are backed up with references.


The List

*UTI's.- Statistically girls get double the number of UTI's then uncut boys get. They treat girls by giving them antibiotics. It would be cheaper, and less invasive to just do the same with boys. Circumcision may reduce the risk of UTIs, but antibiotics eliminates them. (1) (2)

*Balanoposthitis (Balanitis)- Most of the time you can easily treat this: "Since anaerobic conditions are necessary for growth of the offending organisms, simple exposure to air and local cleansing is most often effective. Formerly, this treatment, used with peroxide powder and arsphenamine." (3)

* Inflammatory dermatoses- This can be treated with a topical creme.(4)(5)

*Phimosis (Paraphimosis)- Phimosis does not present itself in children because the foreskin is fused to the head, and the average age of retraction is about 10. This condition is rare and easy to treat. If an adult male has true phimosis, all they have to do is stretch on the foreskin each time they shower for a couple of days and it will start to loosen up. In the most serious cases they can use a steroid crème and it will also loosen up quite easily. (6)(7)

* Penile cancer: Is incredibly rare, so rare men are more likely to get breast cancer first! 1 in 1000 men develop breast cancer each year, while 1 in 100,000 develop penile cancer each year. While circumcision is a way to reduce your risk slightly, statistically guys should be more worried about getting mastectomies then circumcisions.(8)(9)

* STI’s (HPV/Herpes/Chlamydia/etc)- Comparing the US with non circumcising countries, you will find little significant difference in the STI rates. Also a very extensive study done over a 30-year period, tracking a large group of men (nearly evenly circumcised, and uncircumcised) found there was no statistical difference of STI infection between the two groups of men. (10)

* HIV/AIDS- “Many sources of data contradict the claim that circumcision protects against HIV. The United States has one of the highest rates of circumcision and HIV infection in the developed world. European nations, which rarely practice circumcision, have very low rates of HIV. Numerous regions in Africa show higher rates of HIV in circumcised populations compared to uncircumcised populations. For example, 2004 data from Lesotho show HIV infection of 15 percent for uncircumcised males and 23 percent for circumcised males. A 2007 study showed that, once commercial sex worker patterns were taken into consideration, circumcision status was irrelevant in HIV infection rates.”
(11)(12)(13)(14)





(1) http://www.healthinsite.gov.au/topic...act_Infections (Health Insite- Australian Government)
(2) http://www.mydr.com.au/default.asp?article=3061 (MIMS)
(3) http://www.healthscout.com/ency/68/4...omsofBalanitis - (USA TODAY)
(4) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5998395.html
(5) http://www.ijdvl.com/article.asp?iss...oudhury;type=0
(6) http://menshealth.about.com/cs/embar...phimosis_2.htm (About.com-Mens Health)
(7) http://menshealth.about.com/cs/embar...a/phimosis.htm (About.com-Mens Health)
(8) http://organizedwisdom.com/Penile_Cancer
(9)http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/co....asp?sitearea=
(10) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...?dopt=Abstract
(11) http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/200805.../prweb916104_1 (Yahoo News)
(12) http://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/fu...93?cookieSet=1
(13) http://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/pd...469600.2.3.193
(14) http://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/ab...469600.2.3.193

[hollyvangogh]

Where's the rest of the post?

[perspective]

here:

Most of the time circumcision seems like a complex solution to much simpler problems. After looking into all of this, I realized, everything on that list was either rare, or incredibly easy to treat. Also a lot of the stuff that boys get circumcised for are stuff that girls have to deal with as well.

I don’t get it, if being uncircumcised is also just as healthy, then what choice are parents making in terms of a medical decision?

If most of the medical benefits to circumcision are not that significant, then I assume if a parent still circumcises its because they put little to no value in the foreskin. Like “yeah it’s a valueless piece of skin, so even if there is a slight chance of benefit, why not remove it?”
I know my uncut friends certainly find value in their foreskin.
I think it’s a misstep to assume, given the opportunity, that boys would not find value in that area of skin.

[perspective]

yeah, it was a kind of interesting discussion. I liked how the list was put together, the wording of it, is cool.