D
There is no proof that any form of "foreskin restoration" works and the "frenar band" can never be "restored."
Foreskin restoration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
When done by a medical professional, of course its safe. Maybe they should leave the umbilical cord uncut as well...I just hope people will do the safest thing possible.
Adult Male Circumcision Significantly Reduces Risk of Acquiring HIV, December 13, 2006 News Release - National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Epinions.com - Medical Benefits of Circumcision
Medical professionals are the ones performing those with complications (as if amputation of normal, healthy, tissue wasn't a complication in itself) Guess what? They fuck-up too, just like any other doctor.
Correct. Restoration cannot completely restore what is lost but it can restore the glans to its status as an internal organ and the inner foreskin, should any remain, to its job of lubricating and protecting the glans.
Removing breasts prevents breast cancer. Castration prevents prostate cancer. Should we do these too just to prevent disease? Since when is amputation a reasonable substitute for education and a 2 cent piece of latex?
and removing blood from people saves other people's lives and good citizens make this sacrifice everyday. Removal of the foreskin is the same as the removal of the appendix, if its going to have problems and its unecessary, then it should be removed.
People make more blood. You cannot remake your foreskin. When it's gone it's gone.
Removal of the foreskin is not the same. We only remove appendixes when they're inflamed and risk causing death. Foreskins are removed for many reasons that usually have nothing to do with health.
Try telling that to all these naive douchebags who are wasting their time and money by trying to bring it back.
The threat of penile cancer can be eliminated by removing the foreskin, so that's what I mean when it's like removing the appendix.
Despite the "reasons" that people have for removing the foreskin (only part of it is removed by the way), I can't believe that people on this board are actually that insecure that they feel like "a piece of them is missing" by being circumcised. I have seen people with their faces blown off, mutilated, not able to see or speak properly, how dare anyone compare having some extra skin cut off their penis to that. Go cry to an army veteran who had his leg shot off about how you just dont think youre getting that crazy uncircumcised sensation that they've been buzzing about in the gay community (wikipedia said foreskin restoration was a gay/lesbian thing, surprise surprise).
It's their bodies, they're not naive. They're trying to get back some of what was taken from them against their will.
A cancer that strikes less than 1% of men in countries that don't practice circumcision? By that logic we should be removing all kinds of body parts preventively.
But a piece of them IS MISSING! It's justified! They're not imagining things. Army veterans are included among those who think routine infant circumcision is unjustified. And just what kind of argument is that? Just because some people were mutilated in war that means babies should be too? That's absurd. That, "extra skin," is the most highly innervated part of the male body. Learn some anatomy before you jump to conclusions, learn some empathy before you jump to make moral judgments. Your adolescent, holier-than-thou attitude of, "It's wrong for me so it's wrong for everyone else too," indicates a clear lack of self-confidence or the ability to empathize.
And if wikipedia says it then it must be true!
There's no majority of war veterans opposing circumcision, if anything they support it seeing as how the majority of males in the 70's were circumcised. The skin is not a limb and anyone who is missing a limb would be offended if you compared the two. Why dont you go up to an amputee and tell them "yeah I know how you feel, I was circumsised."? Believe me they would kick you if they could. You and the skin strechers are the ones with self-confidence issues, because you're ashamed of yourself and I'm happy the way I am.
You are so sick and desperate to justify your own mutiliation, you'll go to any length won't you. How dare you speak for vets!?! Nobody has appointed you official propaganda machine.
Since many in the military are hispanic and many of them born in Mexico, it's doubtful that they've all been mutilated. The vast majority of the grunts were also born in the 80s and early to mid 90s. Genital mutilation rates have plummeted since the 70s so there's a good chance that many of them are whole men, not partial ones like you.
Removing breasts prevents breast cancer. Castration prevents prostate cancer. Should we do these too just to prevent disease?
And as a complete side note, I would like to hear a well-formed argument about why someone would want their forskin restored. "Because it was taken from me without my approval" is not a well-formed argument :smile: There has to be a specific reason/purpose why you want it back. Not saying there isn't one--just want to hear it :smile:
You know, it's all here already if you're curious. Because restorers are rare, you must realize you can exhaust the supply of people with the patience to address this by just asking it over and over. Ugh. I'll give it another go.I would like to hear a well-formed argument about why someone would want their foreskin restored. "Because it was taken from me without my approval" is not a well-formed argument
I have someone in mind but I'll withhold their name(s).SteveHd: I wonder who turned the circ threads nasty a while ago?