Circumcision and hiv : a dangerous mistake

Circumcision facts by Intaction : 1901: In the American Practitioner and News, Dr. Earnest G. Marks MD wrote, “An advantage of circumcision is the lessened liability to masturbation. A foreskin leads the child to touch it to produce pleasurable sensations from the extremely sensitive foreskin leading to masturbation” 1914: Dr. Abraham Wolbarst wrote Universal Circumcision as a Sanitary Measure, in the Journal of the American Medical Association, “It is a well known fact that the foreskin is a frequent factor in masturbation, not alone in children but in adults as well…Circumcision has become recognized as a most effective remedy.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics doesn’t recommend routine circumcision of all newborns (though they do say that it’s medically necessary in some specific instances). When sorting through circumcision facts and myths, realize circumcision is not guaranteed to prevent any disease. Behavior and hygiene are always more important to health than circumcision. This American doctor group do not recommend circumcision, and all international medical societies do not recommend circumcision. Circumcision is extremely painful to the baby. This is definitely a disadvantage of circumcision. A study in Canada in 1997 set out to determine what anesthesia worked best in the prevention of pain, but the study was stopped midway through because they felt that the babies who were receiving no anesthesia (the control group) were in so much pain that it was unethical for the study to continue. Even in the United States where circumcision is most common, only 45% of doctors use anesthesia at all. There is no mandatory anesthesia or pain relief policy enforced in hospitals for this procedure. This is an important item to consider when discussing circumcision facts and myths.

Circumcision Prevalence: The practice varies geographically around the world. It is more common in the Middle East, the Muslim world, and Israel. Other areas where the practice is popular is in South Korea, parts of Southeast Asia, and some tribal areas in Africa. It was commonly practiced in the United States from 1940’s onwards, however here the practice started declining after 1980. By 2020, American rates for the surgery are retreating to 50%. Infant male circumcision is rare in Europe, Latin America, parts of Southern Africa and most of non-Muslim Asia. The rates are also low in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, especially since their respective medical associations rebuked the practice decades ago. Discover more information on circumcision.

Circumcision’s psychological damage largely stems from the traumatic pain infant’s suffer during the procedure. Research has demonstrated the hormone cortisol, which is associated with stress and pain, spikes during circumcision (Talbert et al., 1976; Gunnar et al., 1981). Although some believe that babies “won’t remember” the pain, we now know that the body “remembers” as evidenced by studies which demonstrate that circumcised infants are more sensitive to pain later in life (Taddio et al., 1997). Research carried out using neonatal animals as a proxy to study the effects of pain on infants’ psychological development have found distinct behavioral patterns characterized by increased anxiety, altered pain sensitivity, hyperactivity, and attention problems (Anand & Scalzo, 2000). In another similar study, it was found that painful procedures in the neonatal period were associated with site-specific changes in the brain that have been found to be associated with mood disorders (Victoria et al., 2013).

Intaction was founded in 2010 out of the strong concern that the American “fee for service” medical and insurance business, its trade associations, PACS, and lobbyists, “the medical industry complex,” were intent on escalating their promotion of infant circumcision. Hospitals, insurance companies, and doctors profit from circumcisions. However Americans were starting to challenge the conventional wisdom of circumcising their sons. Seventeen states dropped Medicaid coverage for infant circumcision, deeming it unnecessary and cosmetic. The medical industry complex and its surrogates responded by launching a counterattack to prevent this threat to their income streams and maintain the status quo they built over many decades. (The most conspicuous evidence of this effort culminated in the 2012 AAP Circumcision Policy Statement – which blatantly stated three times, “Financing Newborn Male recommendation: newborn male circumcision warrant(s) third-party (insurance) reimbursement of the procedure.”) Read even more information at here.