Has anyone heard of a Columbia University study that is pro-circ? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-02-2003, 05:11 PM - Thread Starter
 
MA mommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Triangle Transplant! North Carolina
Posts: 931
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
A friend mentioned she saw this online. She didn't bookmark it though. I'm anti-circ but I like to see what it said.
MA mommy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 09-20-2003, 09:30 AM
 
Xenogenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Jamaica me happy.
Posts: 1,930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
bump
Xenogenesis is offline  
Old 09-20-2003, 04:49 PM
 
Quirky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 11,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well, here's what a quick google search is turning up:

The Columbia school of public health is getting $$ from the Gates Foundation to study the benefits of adult male circ in Africa to prevent HIV transmission.

I came across this law review article that looks interesting and thought I'd post it.

I'll bet www.circinfo.net has the Columbia study if there is one but I cannot stomach reading through that whole mess.

Come visit the NEW QuirkyBaby website -- earn QB Bucks rewards points for purchases, reviews, referrals, and more! Free US shipping on great brands of baby slings and carriers and FREE BabyLegs or babywearing mirror on orders of $100+. Take the QB Quiz for personalized advice!

Quirky is offline  
Old 09-20-2003, 04:59 PM
 
Elphaba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i don't get the circ'ing to stop HIV. do they think the virus is only in the foreskin? i thought it was a bodily fluid thing. do they not think africans can use condoms???? that they'd rather be mutilated and be given a green light to have indiscriminate sex?
Elphaba is offline  
Old 09-21-2003, 05:04 AM
 
Frankly Speaking's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: North Atlanta
Posts: 4,928
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Their thinking is that the inner mucosal foreskin is more susceptable to the virus. The flaw in their thinking is that there is always some inner mucosal foreskin left after circumcision. Usually 1/4 to 1/3 remains after circumcision. Couple that with the other methodological flaws in their "studies" and you will see that this "research" is nothing more than promoting an agenda to spread circumcision around the globe.

There are certain words that spread fear. At different times they have been Black Death (Bubonic Plague), tuberculosis, polio, masturbation and cancer. The latest is HIV/AIDS and I'm not surprised they have used this latest scare word in their promotion of male genital mutilation.


Frank
Frankly Speaking is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off