Unusual Circumcision Style: Information On Safety.

Rockford Tyson

Expert Member
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)
 

Jagtstein

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Posts
329
Media
82
Likes
1,250
Points
213
Location
München
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I'm glad I still have my foreskin, it can be perfectly masturbate with it. With the cleanliness I have no problems because I (Sex masturbation) washing the glans (glans) when retracted foreskin, twice a day and after use.
But the frenulum prepuce remove (frenulectomy) I can only recommend that the benefits are:
1 The foreskin can move backwards, thus has a larger stroke during masturbation possible and the foreskin is more flexible.
2 The penis looks better, because the foreskin can almost unwrinkled pull back.
3 The penis can be kept much better clean.
I have the frenulum with three interventions completely removed itself. But every urologist does that too.
With the cleanliness I have no problems because I wash the glans at the retracted foreskin, twice a day and after use (masturbation, sex). After washing, I dry my glans never expire because the moisture is good for the mucous membrane, :)
 

Flotiz

Mythical Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Posts
2,918
Media
239
Likes
25,992
Points
433
Verification
View
Gender
Male
I am uncut, although I would prefer to be circumcised. In any case, if I had to choose the style for my future circumcision I would like the scar to be as close as possible to the glans (and consequently not very visible). Maybe I would opt for a "low and tight" circumcision. Even at the cost of having to "lose" almost the entire foreskin:

4599161-1594999177-fd2ef0f1a19c9e6ce97388be5d069238.jpg
4599181-1594999181-fe27b77619b077ceb9ce4b4a5ccf87a8.jpg
4599191-1594999182-a1c58a086585921f138218fdb7ef382b.jpg
 

Rockford Tyson

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2019
Posts
120
Media
0
Likes
223
Points
63
Location
New York (United States)
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Notice: I am not interested in discussing the health benefits of circumcision. This thread is regarding the technical safety of the circumcision style I mentioned. I am saying this since all 4 replies concern questioning the medical benefits of circumcision, which is not what I am interested in talking about.
 

hypolimnas

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Posts
2,035
Media
0
Likes
3,027
Points
343
Location
Penisland
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I
Notice: I am not interested in discussing the health benefits of circumcision. This thread is regarding the technical safety of the circumcision style I mentioned. I am saying this since all 4 replies concern questioning the medical benefits of circumcision, which is not what I am interested .

The answer to your questions is no.
 

japetty

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Posts
1,061
Media
2
Likes
3,233
Points
443
Location
New Mexico (United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
It sounds like to me if you want that kind of surgery you are required to involve more sophisticated surgeons and the OR at a much higher cost than $7000.00 just for the surgeon. Don't know how long this would take but the 20 minute or less procedure my Urologist did (Prostate Biopsy) cost total of just a bit less than $ 50,000.00 including the $2500.00 for the Urologist performance.
 

Rockford Tyson

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2019
Posts
120
Media
0
Likes
223
Points
63
Location
New York (United States)
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
You asked a question and the answer is no. You have been given responses by surgeons. The answer is no there is no one who is going to tell you want you want to hear.
I don't want any answers from you, as you are clearly unintelligent and uncough. I want answers from other urologists here, medical doctors, etc. So get lost.
 

hzs3fg

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Posts
3,694
Media
7
Likes
6,092
Points
443
Location
USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% 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)

Let's be absolutely clear about two things: 1, as an uncut guy, it is physically impossible for you to ever know what a cut guy feels or doesn't feel and 2, as cut guys, those people you are listening to can never know what an uncut guy feels.

These are indisputable facts.

Now, the reality is that, having seen many people here over the years who have chosen to get cut as an adult, nearly every single one of them has reported being happy with the decision, having wished they had done so sooner, and reported only positive changes in their sexual response.
 

jp

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Platinum Gold
Cammer
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Posts
1,434
Media
121
Likes
18,091
Points
868
Location
New York City (New York, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
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)

Do you know how your skin scars? Is that part of the concern - placing the scar at the base would keep your skin tone even as well as potentially obscure any lines by pubic hair.

Also, if the cut happens at the base, and some nerves accidentally do get cut, would that potentially desensitize the front of your penis to a larger degree? Just speculating.

If you were able to find a plastic surgeon that could cut from the front, but also give you a fully customized result that keeps all the inner skin and minimizes a scar, that might be a great middle ground?
 

Rockford Tyson

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2019
Posts
120
Media
0
Likes
223
Points
63
Location
New York (United States)
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Let's be absolutely clear about two things: 1, as an uncut guy, it is physically impossible for you to ever know what a cut guy feels or doesn't feel and 2, as cut guys, those people you are listening to can never know what an uncut guy feels.

These are indisputable facts.

Now, the reality is that, having seen many people here over the years who have chosen to get cut as an adult, nearly every single one of them has reported being happy with the decision, having wished they had done so sooner, and reported only positive changes in their sexual response.

I think you can't read properly. I never said that I know how circumcised men feel. I stated that in my penis the most sensitive part is the inner tissue right at the tip, which confirms what intactivists claim. I then followed by saying that it is "probably" true that circumcision would lead to a loss of sexual sensitivity. "Probably" is conditional. It makes it clear that it is a speculation, and not a statement.

And when it comes to circumcision, the only indisputable facts is that circumcision does not impair orgasm and ejaculation. The issue of sexual sensitivity is up in the air. The problem is that "sexual sensitivity" is innately subjective. You can design all the objective tests you want based on touch perception thresholds, but whether variations of this makes sex better or worse is subjective. There was a famous study years ago that showed that circumcised and intact penises were equally sensitive to heat, cold and deep pressure, but only intact penises could detect fine touch. But whether this translates into better sex is debatable.

I resent being called "uncut". It implies that lacking a foreskin is the norm, and that having one is idiosyncratic. The circumcised penis might be the norm in North America, but it is not the norm of Nature. The norm is for human males to have a foreskin, and not lack one due to amputation.

Anyway, I won't divert this thread. I am not interested in debating the effect of circumcision on sexual sensitivity or it's health effects, as I made clear from the start. The topic of the thread is safety of the circumcision style I mentioned.

I won't address the issues of circumcision and sexual sensitivity and healtyh effects of circumcision any longer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheCutGuy

Rockford Tyson

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2019
Posts
120
Media
0
Likes
223
Points
63
Location
New York (United States)
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
There is no 100% safe circumcision

8 boys died in the US in 2019 due to circumcision complications

If anyone tells you circumcision is safe they are 100% lying to you

Oh, Jesus(and I am saying this as an atheist), here comes to the anti-circumcision freaks. Please get lost. Thanks.

Circumcision has one of the lowest rates of fatality of any surgery. Your argument is completely redundant, as it applies to any surgery. If you don't want to run any risks, then stay at home in a bubble as even breathing causes oxidative damage to the tissues of the body, not to mention all the viruses you can get.

Thanks for your post which contributed 0% to the discussion at hand. For the last time...

KEEP THE DISCUSSION TO THE TOPIC AT HAND PLEASE. UNLESS YOU HAVE USEFUL INFORMATION TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE ISSUE OF THE SAFETY OF THE TYPE OF CIRCUMCISION I MENTION WHEN COMPARED TO A REGULAR ONE, DON'T CONTRIBUTE TO MY THREAD!!! THANKS!!!
 

matelalique

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Posts
356
Media
0
Likes
204
Points
263
Location
Chicago (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
So most cut guys in the midwest have a smooth transition of former inner foreskin to normal skin about halfway down down the penis, usually with no obvious circumcision scar, while those circumcised in adulthood have a very clear circular scar.

If I'm reading this correctly, as an uncut man you can retract your foreskin so that the inner skin pretty much reaches the base of the penis (when hard?), and want to remove most of the shaft skin to leave exposed inner foreskin.

It sounds like you want a penis where the inner foreskin starts at the base of the penis and is permanently exposed, which I think would be a kind of cool idea, but I've never see inner foreskin starting below halfway down the shaft.

All of the photos you presented seem to suggest that the outer skin makes it way back up to the coronal edge, and I didn't see any pictures of what sounded like your desired outcome.

The US medical system is a profit vs health/welfare based system, which includes insurance costs. You are probably running into both. The thought is - I can do a circumcision in 15 minutes, why would I not do 16 in the 4 hours for yours. And it sounds like a foreskin based adult circumcision surgically avoids most major nerves and vascular stuff, while yours sounds like someone fishing for a settlement if something goes wrong.

Pay them enough for their time, and for any risk of you suing them, because most will turn you into a dolphin if that is what you want (apologies to South Park).

It sounds like money is not an issue. Ask for more before and after pics - and pay for what you want. If that is what you want it to look like, then go for it and take your chances on the surgeon.

and (c) stop using the cancer arguments. You live in the US, you are going to die of heart disease or stroke about 50% of the time. Basically only the homeless get penile cancer due to total lack of hygiene - you are correct that penile cancer is higher in uncircumcised men (at fractions of a %), but if that is what kills you then you are very unlucky.

Prostate cancer on the other hand may kill you. Most men over the age of 70 will have prostate cancer when they die, but it will not be what kills you. And I am unaware of foreskin increasing prostate cancer - I don't know where you got that idea.

So drop the cancer arguments.

If you think your dick would look prettier without a foreskin - have it cut off. Assume your doctor wants to optimise his profit margin and does not have your best interests in mind, so be the customer. Inform er of exactly what you want it to look like and that you will sue if it doesn't. And then find a doctor prepared to meet your price.

M
 
  • Like
Reactions: jp

chris bell

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Posts
477
Media
4
Likes
3,943
Points
313
Location
Tampa (Florida, United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Oh, Jesus(and I am saying this as an atheist), here comes to the anti-circumcision freaks. Please get lost. Thanks.

Circumcision has one of the lowest rates of fatality of any surgery. Your argument is completely redundant, as it applies to any surgery. If you don't want to run any risks, then stay at home in a bubble as even breathing causes oxidative damage to the tissues of the body, not to mention all the viruses you can get.

Thanks for your post which contributed 0% to the discussion at hand. For the last time...

KEEP THE DISCUSSION TO THE TOPIC AT HAND PLEASE. UNLESS YOU HAVE USEFUL INFORMATION TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE ISSUE OF THE SAFETY OF THE TYPE OF CIRCUMCISION I MENTION WHEN COMPARED TO A REGULAR ONE, DON'T CONTRIBUTE TO MY THREAD!!! THANKS!!!

YOU asked if circumcision is safe, I stated a FACT that 8 boys died from their circumcision last year in the US

I don't know about you but I would consider death from circumcision as not safe.
 
S

SirConcis

Guest
Cornell has a lot fo experience iwth "normal" circumcision and no t much withy the basal ones. I beleive they are more common in Japan.

The standard circumcision instruments don't work for basal, so it needs to be freehand, so not touching the important undrlying tisseu becomes important, and harder to work due to location near belly. (but advantage is once you grow hair, your circ line is mostly hidden except when erect where it is between scrotum and shaft.

You can get a conventional circumcision that is high enough to preserve the "ridges" on dorsal sice, but not on ventrakl side. when the cut happens almopst always reconfigures your frenuluj to be "cut" (even of frenulum not cut, it ends up joining the circ line as a thin line instead of tye uncut configurayion where it spread in both diorection to join the "ridges" of wrinkly foreskin.

The basal ciorc does preserve that, but if your penis is confgure right, the tight shjaft skin can result in it being smooth all over and look cut without wrinkles anyways.