Had routine circumcision been in place-48% reduction in STD's

OMG, is that his real name? :lol:

I'm sorry, I was having a 12 year old boy moment.

And again, do you live in Uganda? Because I don''t. I might also consider a PLAGUE vaccine for my kids, as THAT is prevalent there, too, but it isn't where I live, so there is no reason to "prevent" what is most likely unlikely.

 

for a smart lady maggie sugar u seem pretty nieve!
It doenst' matter where they live. men are all built the same!

 

U seem to be pretty smart maggie but very stupid when it comes to circumcision.

let me quote what u said. NO reason to prevent what is most likely unlikely. DID u realize that hiv/aids have affected millions of people in united states.. You are telling us we need to practice safe sex than u contradict yourself by saying its most likely unlikely.that we will catch this virus. People die daily from aids, how can u be so blinded by your negetivity..If circ will save millions of people u should be backing them up not by saying AIDS wont happen to me!! LOL... Whether u are in uganda or living in canada or the states millions of people are dieing.. Preventative measure should be taken and that means condoms, abstinence and circumcision!!!

Dont be stupid saying its unlikely when AIDS IS EVERYWHERE!! studies are taken in a country where their is millions of uncut people and aids is 20 million, they are able to circ men who are overal healthy and than do stats monthly!!
They have now determinned 53% of men can be saved from HIV by getting circ and that is enough MEDICAL PROOF to prove it is a medical preventative measure!

It makes me soo mad that people who are soo negetive about circumcision refuse to understand how it will safe peoples lives!!!! So ignorant for you to say " i dont live there why do i care"!!

Stupid ignorance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You should be ashamed of yourself for being soo ignorant!

 

OK so you are right in that for the most part men are the same physically. But there are difference culturally that can cause the results of the study to only hold true for the people who participated in the study.

1. Hygiene difference Men here bathe more often and clean themselves better than in Africa.
2. Sex practices. Men here also typically clean up after sex.
3. It might sound funny but women also play a big role. What kind of women men choose to sleep make a difference.
I can keep going but I will stop here.


Oh, a it is not ignorant to question things that you see in the news or on TV. It's good to questions things in life instead on blindly going with the flow. You might actually learn something usefull

 

:lol:

 

A report comes out saying that circumsision is as efective as soap & water at preventing AIDS in Africa. Rather than organizing Dove drives, people conclude what I have long suspected; African penises are too long and need to be shortened.

 

Your absolutely right about hygiene being a factor, However on this site we had a topic on how often we bathe, and the average was 3 times a week. im sure in other countries/ this is the norm as well. This is not often enough to fight infections in our countries or others. Most of these studies that have been conducted have given men SEX EDUCATION prior to getting circumcized... And your comment on woman playing a big roll... Now we all know that in some countries woman ARE NOT equal to men and are raped @ young ages becuase it will SPIRITUAL CLEAN THE MALES... This is carried on into adulthood for some woman!

My point on this whole subject is if there is a chance that men could and theirs a higher chance for them to get aids/hiv. I as a mom will do as much possible to make sure he is aware of sex educations as well as using all preveentative measures. and that means circumcision! (which now seems to be a prevenative measure for contacting an std and HIV/AIDS)

 

LMAO!

Pretty much sums up this thread...

 

No. He's Belgian Flemish, the name is a Francoized version of the common Dutch name "Kock".

 

Today's New York Times has this headine story - "H.I.V.Risk Halved by Circumcision, U.S. Agency Finds". Those of you on the other side of this issue can make light of it and use "mutilation" and "pain" smokescreens to obscure the issue, but the fact is the U.S. Institutes of Health have now supported circumcision strongly. HIV and STDs are worldwide health issues and not just African health issues.

The LA Times ended its story on the same subject as follows:

...CELLS OF THE FORESKIN APPEARED TO BE MORE FRAGILE THAN THOSE ON THE REST OF THE PENIS, AND THUS MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO INVASION BY HIV. THE FOLDS OF THE UNCIRCUMCISED PENIS CAN ALSO TRAP THE VIRUS, HOLDING IT AGAINST THE PENIS IN A WARM, MOIST ENVIRONMENT THAT PROMOTES INFECTION."

Pass the knife, anyone? Cutted

 

I have read both those articles and both failed to say with what frequency these people had sex, whether or not it was unprotected and with how many different partners. So I won't be cutting anything of of my wiener as long as I do'n't know this

 

That article is quite wrong and blatantly dangerous - foreskin or not you will get hiv if you engage in unprotected sex with a carrier. The foreskin is designed to protect from germs not viruses - viruses enter the body via much different mechanisms you must have read this on a site that is far from scientifically unbiased
Circumcision is a terrible injustice to babies and constitutes abuse !
If anyone old enough to think about circumcision considers having that operation it might be best to wonder why we have a foreskin. Its there to protect and to be an area of stimulation during sexual intercourse.
One of the reasons that circumcision became a preoccupation of parents in the USA in earlier history is actually because morality in times past suggested that sexual excitement was a sin and has little if anything to do with cleanliness - infact part of the reason boys have a foreskin is to protect that area from infection. It protects from bacterial infection, not viral infection. The abscence of a foreskin leaves the person open to both bacterial and viral infection

 

The studies involved thousands of men in Kenya and South Africa. In Kenya 60% of the men are already circumcised, but in South Africa one tribe circumcises, the other does not regularly. The researchers took one group of uncut men and boys, and gave them all instruction in protecting themselves from STDS, and then circumcised half of them, and checked them out periodically for HIV. When the results came in, there was a 50% greater chance of getting HIV in the uncircumcised groups in both countries. THE STUDIES WERE SUSPENDED BECAUSE THEY WERE JUDGED TO BE DEFINITIVE, AND BECAUSE IT WAS CRUEL TO USE HUMANS AS GUINEA PIGS ANY FURTHER WHEN IT WAS CLEAR THAT THE RESULTS WERE CONCLUSIVE. THE ARGUMENT IS OVER.

Foreskins were placed on our penises by our Creator because primative man used to go naked in the jungle, and the foreskin protected the glans from damage by thorns, etc. But we now wear clothes!

 

That is SOOOOOOO!!!!!! un ethical. There is no way these studies could be conducted any where else. The Psychological review boards here and in most other countries would not let this type of research take place. It is not clear that the results are conclusive because they created the situation and the resutls are very very very biased.

 

The findings are in fact CONCLUSIVE!!

U.S. Institutes of Health would not support it AT ALL if the results were unclear or biased. !

!!!!The argument is over!!!!

 

why does the uk have a lower aids rate than the usa then I think its 0.2 percent of the population in the uk point 0.6 in the usa and in america you have a much higher number of circumcised people .
both countrys are quiet low compared to many countrys but you would think if it was so good being circumcised it would at least be the other way round .

 

Please read the Guidlines. http://www.hipforums.com/forumguidelines.htm In your case, number 10 might be what you need to read. Don't bother complaining.

 

Excellent point, Johnny.

If circing "prevents" AIDS and everyone is as at risk as everyone else, then the UK should be the HIV capital, and it ISN'T. There is a lot more to getting HIV than circing.

 

HIV can be transmitted by needles and unprotected gay anal sex, and can enter the body from cuts in the penis, foreskin or not. Both the US and Britain have low HIV rates compared to African coiuntries, where the HIV rate reaches 30% in some countries in Africa. They are past having hypothetical arguments over the issue - there is a serious crisis, and something needs to be done - now.

The studies were scientifically valid - to take a controlled population, such as the tribe in South Africa that does not circumcise, and give them the same education about the dangers of HIV and STDs, and then test them to make sure they do not have HIV, then set them loose and test them a year or so later on. The researchers had no idea what the study would sho, or if they all would only have protected sex, but when the results came in, they were so conclusive that there was no more need to carry on the study and put further people at risk. With the huge crisis in Africa which could very well extinguish ther populations of some countries, there is no doubt that a massive circumcision program will soon begin throughout Africa.

Whether or not that will causeBritain's National Health to reverse its position regarding circumcision which it has had since the early 1950s is unclear, but there are more and more Africans moving to Europe (more than to the US), so the HIV problem will be transported from Africa bigtime in future years.

 

I don't care about the studies. Its someone else's body part. It's your son's foreskin, not yours. Don't take it away from him unless there is a good reason (which is being debated) AND delay cannot be brooked. If you are thinking of circumsising him to prevent STD's, wait until he has a chance to say "No thanks, I'll be celebate instead." (or until the next study refutes this one.)

Even though infant circumsision is done with the best intentions, it is the removal of another person's body part. Leave their body intact. Transmit both the foreskin and the option to your son.

How far sighted the decision is not an issue. Its not your body part. Let the one who has to live with the consiquences of a bad decision be the one to make the decision.