- Joined
- Sep 17, 2005
- Posts
- 1,226
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 23
- Points
- 183
- Location
- Bay Area, California
- Sexuality
- 69% Straight, 31% Gay
- Gender
- Male
I don't know if somebody posted a link to this article recently, but just in case somebody hasn't yet, I'd like to mention this article which states "promoting male circumcision in Africa is risky and dangerous and could lead to more HIV infections".
Since we've seen quite a few debates on LPSG about circumcision, I hope this article provides for a more informed debate. Especially since much of the debate mentioned studies claiming that circumcision reduced HIV infection rates.
The article at this website ( Male Circumcision Ineffective in HIV Battle According to New Future HIV Therapy Report ) mentions a paper published in the May issue of Future HIV Therapy.
Some highlights from the article:
"The paper also cautions against neonatal circumcision for HIV prevention, stating it is unethical to circumcise an infant for a possible benefit 15–20 years later, if at all, to reduce the risk of contracting an adult-acquired disease for which there are far more effective prevention strategies available."
And then goes on to say that HIV infection rates are actually higher in nations with higher rates of circumcision. (Side note from me: Just because we see a positive correlation between circumcision rates and HIV infection rates does mean there is a causal link. It's quite possible the lower rates in Europe are due to better sex education for teens, or more widespread use of condoms, or something else.)
"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."
A similar article in the March 2008 issue of Journal of Pediatrics. That article states "circumcision does not appear to shield men from types of sexually transmitted diseases."
You can read the 2nd article here:
ICGI - Genital Integrity Blog Archive Circumcision does not shield men from STD
Since we've seen quite a few debates on LPSG about circumcision, I hope this article provides for a more informed debate. Especially since much of the debate mentioned studies claiming that circumcision reduced HIV infection rates.
The article at this website ( Male Circumcision Ineffective in HIV Battle According to New Future HIV Therapy Report ) mentions a paper published in the May issue of Future HIV Therapy.
Some highlights from the article:
- Previous studies claiming circumcision reduced HIV infection rates were seriously flawed both in methodology and in not getting enough evidence to back up their claims.
- Circumcision as practiced in Africa is risky and dangerous.
- It could lead to more HIV infections because many African males believe they will no longer need to wear condoms.
- It creates a false sense of immunity and leads to more risk-taking behaviors.
- Men were paid to be circumcised and received free condoms. (If they get free condoms, then no wonder they were less likely to get infected.)
- The studies were halted after too short a time to measure effectiveness of circumcision at reducing infection rates.
- Promoting circumcision will drain money away from more effective prevention strategies.
- Badly done circumcisions cause tens of thousands of infections and other surgical complications, further straining an already overwhelmed healthcare system.
"The paper also cautions against neonatal circumcision for HIV prevention, stating it is unethical to circumcise an infant for a possible benefit 15–20 years later, if at all, to reduce the risk of contracting an adult-acquired disease for which there are far more effective prevention strategies available."
And then goes on to say that HIV infection rates are actually higher in nations with higher rates of circumcision. (Side note from me: Just because we see a positive correlation between circumcision rates and HIV infection rates does mean there is a causal link. It's quite possible the lower rates in Europe are due to better sex education for teens, or more widespread use of condoms, or something else.)
"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."
A similar article in the March 2008 issue of Journal of Pediatrics. That article states "circumcision does not appear to shield men from types of sexually transmitted diseases."
You can read the 2nd article here:
ICGI - Genital Integrity Blog Archive Circumcision does not shield men from STD