B_josiah852
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2006
- Posts
- 1,958
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 57
- Points
- 183
- Location
- In the Rolling Hills
- Sexuality
- 69% Straight, 31% Gay
- Gender
- Male
I am uncut. The head of my cock is so clean you can eat off of it. The only men who don't keep their penis clean are idiots. Foreskin doesn't cause penile cancer anymore than eyelids cause eye cancer. If a man doesn't wash a foreskin covered penis that man wouldn't wash his cut penis. More than likely doesn't wash his asshole either. Another words he will be a nasty freak and no one would want to have sex with him, cut or uncut. Oh well to each his own.
I'm cut, but I have no preference. I like both cut and uncut dicks.
Though there is a very strong, almost vitriolic anti-circumcision voice that pops up in nearly every thread that is so despicable, especially given all the new information about the benefits of circumcision in preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Though there is a very strong, almost vitriolic anti-circumcision voice that pops up in nearly every thread that is so despicable, especially given all the new information about the benefits of circumcision in preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Same here DarkAuron, been restoring for years now. I have full coverage when flacid. JO without lube and more sensitive. Don't like the fact that I was cut without my consent and for no valid reason. If forskins were useless I would think evolution would had circumcised all of us long ago.
I guess I'm one of those "vitriolic anti-circumcision voices" you think is "despicable". So you asked for it.
Infant circumcision is despicable. It's a violation of human common morality: You don't harm the unwilling unless there is compelling reason. Moreover, an infant/child isn't capable of giving consent to it.
If those rigged studies persuade adults to get circumcised, fine, it's their own stupid mistake. But the "studies" don't justify infant circumcision in any way.
D_Egloshayle Churchkey
Experimental Member
I generally agree with you regarding infant circumcision, and the fact that the HIV research was critically flawed. Some emerging evidence is coming out of Australia, however, that suggests circ may reduce risk of prostate cancer (I'll find a link if I can). Still, it is a reduced risk, not an outright negation of risk. Then again, stapling your mouth shut reduces your risk of obesity ...
bendigoboi
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2007
- Posts
- 677
- Media
- 4
- Likes
- 89
- Points
- 248
- Location
- Bendigo, Australia
- Sexuality
- 90% Straight, 10% Gay
- Gender
- Male
I suspect that the "cut generation" in Oz is only now moving into the age group where prostate cancer is an issue for their health, so statistically, uncut men will currently have a higher incidence of prostate cancer (I'm sure the research would take some account of this - wouldn't it??)
The biggest issue for prostate cancer is for men to get checked before the cancer becomes in-operable!
Unusual for my generation, I'm happily uncut, and so is my son - naturally!
I would add that some research also showed similar "results" in the USA, however, it could be that Jews, who are routinely circumcised, have different epidemiological reasons for lower incidences of prostate cancer, e.g. genetic, diet, life style.
I have not seen anything that makes a direct causal connection between circumcision and prostate cancer.
What is Prostate Cancer? - WebMD
"On a case-by-case basis, doctors cannot say with certainty what causes prostate cancer, but experts generally agree that diet contributes to the risk. Men who consume large amounts of fat -- particularly from red meat and other sources of animal fat -- are most likely to develop advanced prostate cancer. The disease is much more common in countries where meat and dairy products are dietary staples than in countries where the basic diet consists of rice, soybean products, and vegetables...
...Researchers know more about what will not cause prostate cancer than what will. No proven link exists between prostate cancer and an active sex life, vasectomy, masturbation, use of alcohol or tobacco, circumcision, infertility, infection of the prostate, or a common noncancerous condition called benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) that causes an enlarged prostate gland. Most elderly men experience an enlarged prostate to some degree."
Likewise the HIV studies are probably more to do with general lifestyle and cleanliness.
Circumcision is an assault.
(and no I am not, despite the efforts of the doctor who delivered me).
A
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Posts
- 593
- Media
- 30
- Likes
- 7,834
- Points
- 598
- Location
- Dallas (Texas, United States)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 90% Straight, 10% Gay
- Gender
- Male
nakedwally
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Posts
- 3,078
- Media
- 37
- Likes
- 396
- Points
- 303
- Age
- 43
- Location
- Plantation (Florida, United States)
- Sexuality
- No Response
- Gender
- Male
well no one asked me when they circumcised me, i don't know what i prefer since i haven't had foreskin since i was a baby and i don't remember
Male Circumcision Overstated As Prevention Tool Against AIDS
Anyway, a baby's risk of acquiring HIV is absolutely zero, unless his mother is infected. Sorry about the vitriol.
But still, I'll listen to doctors. The author of the paper is a former Goldman Sachs VP, not a doc, and his conclusions aren't based on randomized, controlled trials like the ones I'm referring to. Here are a few studies that are worth looking into...
Adult male circumcision significantly reduces risk of acquiring HIV (7000+ participants...the data was so overwhelming, and the public health benefit so clear that the trial was stopped)
Adult Male Circumcision Significantly Reduces Risk of Acquiring HIV: Trials in Kenya and Uganda Stopped Early
or
Male circumcision reduces risk of HPV and Cervical Cancer in female partners
NEJM -- Male Circumcision, Penile Human Papillomavirus Infection, and Cervical Cancer in Female Partners
Again, I'm not saying that everyone needs to get circumcised, but to call the practice barbaric in the face of this sort of strong medical evidence is irresponsible. I say make your own decision, circumsice or don't, just don't judge those who choose differently.
Adult male circumcision significantly reduces risk of acquiring HIV (7000+ participants...the data was so overwhelming, and the public health benefit so clear that the trial was stopped)
Adult Male Circumcision Significantly Reduces Risk of Acquiring HIV: Trials in Kenya and Uganda Stopped Early
or
Male circumcision reduces risk of HPV and Cervical Cancer in female partners
NEJM -- Male Circumcision, Penile Human Papillomavirus Infection, and Cervical Cancer in Female Partners
Again, I'm not saying that everyone needs to get circumcised, but to call the practice barbaric in the face of this sort of strong medical evidence is irresponsible. I say make your own decision, circumsice or don't, just don't judge those who choose differently.
Did you just purposely ignore the study I posted which is more recent than the ones you posted?
They have a vaccine for HPV now. The American Cancer Society says that risk factors for cervical cancer are smoking and multiple sexual partners.
We're always talking about two different things. Adults and infants. Remember that. People talk about circ like it's a no loss proposition. I don't know any other body part that people would believe that about. Hmm. Maybe a lot of people are fools.
Similar threads
