- Joined
- May 20, 2019
- Posts
- 120
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 223
- Points
- 63
- Location
- New York (United States)
- Sexuality
- 50% Straight, 50% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Hello. First of all, I don't know if this is the appropriate forum.
Anyway, I am thinking about getting circumcised for a long time, mostly for cosmetic reasons and as a prophylaxis for cancer prevention. However, I never went through with it because the inner foreskin is much more sensitive than the rest of the skin, and the inner skin right at the tip is 10 X more sensitive than that. As an uncircumcised male, I can confirm that the "intactivists" are right.(sorry to you guys that resent having been cut and wonder if you are losing sexual pleasure. Yeah, you probably are. Sorry.).
Before, my desire was simply cosmetic. However, there is now overwhelming evidence that circumcision has a very strong protective effect against both penile and prostate cancer. The otehr benefits don't really matter. For instance, urinary tract infections are easily treated with antibiotics. And STDs are prevented much more effectively with condoms than with circumcision. But the protective effect against cancer is significant, and cancer is a really big deal(best case scenario for penile cancer: you lose your penis. Worst case scenario: it metasthsizes and you die.
So, I was looking for a circumcision style that would allow me to preserve all the inner tissue of the foreskin up to the tip. A "high" circumcision is just not good enough. While a "high" circumcision preserves most of the inner foreskin, you still lose the frenular band right at the tip, which is the most exquisitely sensitive part of my penis.
After searching, I found a doctor in NYC that does something he calls a "cosmetic circumciison", where skin is cut from the base of the penis. I had a consultation with him. He charges over $7,000 for it, and it takes 3 hours. Apparently, cutting skin from the base is not as simple as doinjg it in the front, due to a bunch of lymphatic vessel and nerve issues. I procrastinated, and when I finally decided to pay the small fortune for it, his secretary informed me he no longer does this as it takes too much operating time and he would rather focus on penile implants.
I contacted two urologists that specialize in adult circumcision, doctors Cornell and Reed(now retired), and both said they don't do this circumcision as the risks are unacceptable. I asked what are those risks, and they told me that removing skin there risks permanent lymphedema and nerve damage. Cutting that close to the body causes massive disruption of lymphatics, causing severe swelling, and the nerves of the penis are much closer to the surface there than at the tip pf the penis. A wrong nick and the penis goes numb forever.
I have a suspicion that the reason why these two urologists do not do this circumcision is not because it is not possible, but because it reHowever, despite both Cornell and Reed being adamant that this type of circumciison is too dangerous, there is another urologist who specializes in circumcision, who states that it is perfectly safe. I talked to him by email, and he said that, in this type of circumcision, the skin is not really cut but disected, and that all lymphatics, veins and nerves must be preserved. He says that Cornell and Reed are right that the risks are unacceptable if you are to perform it with the same technique you use for a regular circumcision, where they cut down to Buck's fascia. He said urologists don't like to do it because few have the skills, and the few who do have the skills don't want to waste 2.5-4 hours in a circumcision, which is considered a minor surgery. He now offers this circumcision in his website, but the problem is that he has exactly one photo of a penis with this circumcision. There are no signs of lymphedema, but a sample of one is always a bad sample.
My suspicion is that this circumciison requires a very high level of skill they either don't have or don't want to use in a circumcision. The creator of this circumcision, Dr.Eid, is not just an urologist and surgeon, but a master surgeon. He is a professor of urological surgery, and performs extremely complicated procedures like hypospadias repair.
So the question I have is, are there any urologists, physiologists, doctors of someone who has been through this surgery to clarify the issue of safety? This circumcision seems ideal to me, but needing skin graphs or even losing the penis over some unsafe surgery is not worth it.
Here are photos of this type of circumcision: Cosmetic Circumcision by NY Urologist Dr. Eid | Before and After Photos
And from Dr.Bidair: Proximal Cosmetic Circumcision Archives | Bidair, Mohamed (socalcircumcision.com)
Anyway, I am thinking about getting circumcised for a long time, mostly for cosmetic reasons and as a prophylaxis for cancer prevention. However, I never went through with it because the inner foreskin is much more sensitive than the rest of the skin, and the inner skin right at the tip is 10 X more sensitive than that. As an uncircumcised male, I can confirm that the "intactivists" are right.(sorry to you guys that resent having been cut and wonder if you are losing sexual pleasure. Yeah, you probably are. Sorry.).
Before, my desire was simply cosmetic. However, there is now overwhelming evidence that circumcision has a very strong protective effect against both penile and prostate cancer. The otehr benefits don't really matter. For instance, urinary tract infections are easily treated with antibiotics. And STDs are prevented much more effectively with condoms than with circumcision. But the protective effect against cancer is significant, and cancer is a really big deal(best case scenario for penile cancer: you lose your penis. Worst case scenario: it metasthsizes and you die.
So, I was looking for a circumcision style that would allow me to preserve all the inner tissue of the foreskin up to the tip. A "high" circumcision is just not good enough. While a "high" circumcision preserves most of the inner foreskin, you still lose the frenular band right at the tip, which is the most exquisitely sensitive part of my penis.
After searching, I found a doctor in NYC that does something he calls a "cosmetic circumciison", where skin is cut from the base of the penis. I had a consultation with him. He charges over $7,000 for it, and it takes 3 hours. Apparently, cutting skin from the base is not as simple as doinjg it in the front, due to a bunch of lymphatic vessel and nerve issues. I procrastinated, and when I finally decided to pay the small fortune for it, his secretary informed me he no longer does this as it takes too much operating time and he would rather focus on penile implants.
I contacted two urologists that specialize in adult circumcision, doctors Cornell and Reed(now retired), and both said they don't do this circumcision as the risks are unacceptable. I asked what are those risks, and they told me that removing skin there risks permanent lymphedema and nerve damage. Cutting that close to the body causes massive disruption of lymphatics, causing severe swelling, and the nerves of the penis are much closer to the surface there than at the tip pf the penis. A wrong nick and the penis goes numb forever.
I have a suspicion that the reason why these two urologists do not do this circumcision is not because it is not possible, but because it reHowever, despite both Cornell and Reed being adamant that this type of circumciison is too dangerous, there is another urologist who specializes in circumcision, who states that it is perfectly safe. I talked to him by email, and he said that, in this type of circumcision, the skin is not really cut but disected, and that all lymphatics, veins and nerves must be preserved. He says that Cornell and Reed are right that the risks are unacceptable if you are to perform it with the same technique you use for a regular circumcision, where they cut down to Buck's fascia. He said urologists don't like to do it because few have the skills, and the few who do have the skills don't want to waste 2.5-4 hours in a circumcision, which is considered a minor surgery. He now offers this circumcision in his website, but the problem is that he has exactly one photo of a penis with this circumcision. There are no signs of lymphedema, but a sample of one is always a bad sample.
My suspicion is that this circumciison requires a very high level of skill they either don't have or don't want to use in a circumcision. The creator of this circumcision, Dr.Eid, is not just an urologist and surgeon, but a master surgeon. He is a professor of urological surgery, and performs extremely complicated procedures like hypospadias repair.
So the question I have is, are there any urologists, physiologists, doctors of someone who has been through this surgery to clarify the issue of safety? This circumcision seems ideal to me, but needing skin graphs or even losing the penis over some unsafe surgery is not worth it.
Here are photos of this type of circumcision: Cosmetic Circumcision by NY Urologist Dr. Eid | Before and After Photos
And from Dr.Bidair: Proximal Cosmetic Circumcision Archives | Bidair, Mohamed (socalcircumcision.com)