Circumcision Urged in Curbing AIDS Spread

[DC_DEEP]

Hmm... wear a condom... cut off part of my penis... wear a condom... cut off part of my penis... wear a condom... cut off part of my penis... Alright, I've decided. I'm going to cut off part of my penis on the basis of sketchy, non-controlled "studies". That should keep me healthy, and I won't have to use a condom. [/sarcasm]

OK-- cuz I was going to say that 3" red stilletos are CLASSY
4" makes them slutty

No. It's wearing the micro-mini skirt without knickers that makes them slutty.

 

[chico8]

Australian Study


Well, looks like we have proof of what we've suspected all along. Gay men do not benefit from circumcision.

Circumcision, gay men and HIV incidence in Sydney

The second study found that circumcision would not be an effective HIV prevention tool for gay men, at least in Australia. The presentation, reported by David Templeton of the National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research, University of New South Wales, gave details of a study looking at circumcision status and HIV seroconversion in the Health in Men (HIM) cohort of homosexual men in Sydney.

The HIM cohort follows 1,427 initially HIV-negative men recruited between 2001 – 2004. Data were collected on circumcision status, sexual risk behaviour, and the incidence of sexually transmitted infections. Annual HIV tests were also performed. At enrolment, two-thirds (66%) of cohort participants reported being circumcised. In a substudy, 247 men had a physical examination to determine if men were able to accurately report their circumcision status. This study found that 100% of men were able to correctly determine if they were circumcised or not.

In 2006, there were 49 seroconversions among cohort participants (29 in circumcised men, 13 in uncircumcised men), representing an incidence of 0.80 per 100 patient years. There was no difference in the incidence of HIV infection between circumcised and uncircumcised men. This remained true when the analysis controlled for age, anorectal sexually transmitted infections, and insertive or receptive unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with someone who was HIV-positive.

Among the men who reported not having receptive UAI, there were nine seroconversions, for an incidence of 0.35 per 100 patient years. Once again, there was no difference in the risk of HIV infection between circumcised and uncircumcised men.

The researchers conclude: “Although statistical power was limited, among men who were more likely to acquire through insertive UAI, there was no relationship [between circumcision and HIV seroconversion]. As most HIV infections in homosexual men occur after receptive anal sex, circumcision is unlikely to be an effective HIV prevention intervention in Australian gay men.”

 

[SomeGuyOverThere]

So, if circumcised African Muslims have an extremely high rate of AIDS but circumcised Arabian Muslims have a much lower rate of infection then could there be something else in play? Could genetics be a factor?

It's a cultural and economic one. Not enough people wear condoms here in the west, but it's hard enough to get them let alone use them in Africa. Sexual Health education is virtually non-existent and so is contraception.

Recalling the course I took that focused on the issue, there are also a lot of issues with levels of rape. There are often exceedingly high levels of rape in areas which go hand in hand with high HIV/AIDS levels, especially rape of young girls, a lot of which stem from the mistaken belief that having sex with a virgin cures the disease. A myth which was spread by many witchdoctors in the 1990s, and probably still is today.

Another issue is to do with prostitutes. Apparently it's rather common to have brothels along trade routes in parts of Africa (RSA was where the article i read was talknig about), and without sexual health clinics and testing a lot of the women worknig in them have no idea that they are carrying HIV, which is then spread to the men passing through who then spread it further to other brothels which pass it on to other men and then to their wives which leads to babies being born with HIV.

Look by contrast at Middle Eastern Muslim nations which have exceedingly strict laws on procreation and don't have herbalists and witchdoctors spreading false cures, but instead have western-style medicene and money to spend on health and education, and you ssee why Aradic Muslims have far lower HIV/AIDS rates than African ones.

 

[SteveHd]

I wish to complement Danerain, Pye, and SpoiledPrincess for discussing something enormously more relevant than those contrived African studies. Thank you.

 

[Kotchanski]

Coronation Street is on, and Ashley can't see that he's being manipulated by Psycho bitch while his wife is hiding away at her mothers. Its going to be a stormy few weeks for the Peacocks...

 

[iruka]

Seems to me that other factors are at play.

In addition, it doesn't help that US funding of AIDS charities in Africa places restrictions on the use of the money.

"The condom shortage has developed because both the Ugandan government and the US, which is the main donor for HIV/Aids prevention, have allowed supplies to dwindle, according to an American pressure group, the Centre for Health and Gender Equity (Change).

In 2003, President Bush declared he would spend $15bn on his emergency plan for Aids relief, but receiving aid under the programme has moral strings attached.

Recipient countries have to emphasise abstinence over condoms, and - under a congressional amendment - they must condemn prostitution."

Bush accused of Aids damage to Africa | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited

 

[SteveHd]

Here's a site that offers free condoms: Smack Osama - Go ahead Smack the bastard!!

 

[DC_DEEP]

Oh well, I guess this same old tired urban legend is going to keep getting its own new thread about twice a month.

 

[Reticent horse]

This is ridiculous. The only way to be safe is to use a condom.

 

[B_Italian1]

Okay, that was from 2006. The "studies" have since been torn to shreads for being full of crap.

That was from 2006, but a search of Google news articles on circumcision pulled up over 1400 new articles so it's very recent.

circumcision - Google News

I think this is definitely an excellent idea if all these experts are saying so and the studies have proved it. Uncut men are so much more susceptible to the HIV virus, so it could have a huge impact on cutting down on HIV infections.

Circumcision obviously is nothing new. It's been done for thousands of years, and now with people so much more sexually active than before they should at least think about it. If you're in a monogamous relationship it wouldn't matter, but other than that, it's probably worth looking into.

I was cut as a baby and growing up I assumed everyone was. That's all I saw in the locker rooms in junior high and high school. My dad didn't have a circumcision until he was 20 after repeated problems. It seemed liked everyone was cut for a while, then there was this big anti circumcision movement going on, and now it appears that things are changing and cut will be back in.

 

[B_Italian1]

This is ridiculous. The only way to be safe is to use a condom.

In a perfect world which we never have had and never will live in.

 

[B_Italian1]

Australian Study


Well, looks like we have proof of what we've suspected all along. Gay men do not benefit from circumcision.

But is also says:

"The first conducted amongst MSM in South America found that circumcision would be acceptable as a method of HIV prevention. The second, however, found that circumcised and uncircumcised gay men in Sydney, Australia, had the same risk of becoming infected with HIV."

More studies need to be done.

 

[Matthew]

Welcome to LPSG, interesting first post.

*instigate, instigate*

You called it.

On topic, you can't really believe "slut" starts at 4". You're only at "escort" level until at least 5".

 

[jeff black]

Personally, I do think that one doesn't need to run out and get a circ to protect themselves from AIDS. Isn't sex with a condom cheaper and less painful?

 

[SpoiledPrincess]

I saw coronations street for the first time in months Kotchanski, I was shocked at Ashley Peacock.

 

[No_Strings]

Hollyoaks is so much more realistic.

 

[SpoiledPrincess]

Hollyoaks is rubbish although it does have more shopping scenes than coronation street.

 

[No_Strings]

And more eyecandy. :biggrin1:

 

[SpoiledPrincess]

Are you insinuating Rita and Vera aren't woman enough for any man NS?

 

[No_Strings]

That's exactly my point SP. (Well, Rita can look quite good when she's glammed up...)