Home > India > The male foreskin is dangerous- Circumcision protects .

The male foreskin is dangerous- Circumcision protects .

                  Health information politicized

Doesn’t the public have the right to know that male circumcision protects against HIV?

In 2007, the ethical landscape surrounding medical male circumcision (MC) suddenly lurched and shifted when the World Health Organization and UNAIDS declared unequivocally that the `efficacy of male circumcision in reducing female to male transmission of HIV has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.The male foreskin has been shown to have a high number of cells that were targeted by the HIV virus

Interestingly, evidence that MC had medical benefits has been mounting for more than 20 years. Not only does the procedure reduce the risk of HIV infection, it also has been shown  to

  • prevent urinary tract infections,
  • sexually transmitted diseases, and
  • penile and prostate cancers.

Researchers have even found that MC reduces the risk of cervical cancer in current female partners . In spite of that growing list of medical benefits, the issue has hovered just below the radar screen until several large randomised controlled studies from Africa showed that circumcision offered a 60% to 70% protective effect against the heterosexual acquisition of HIV. The evidence was so compelling that three of the studies were stopped early, on the recommendation of Data Safety and Monitoring Boards

The Government of India has been reluctant to approach an issue that
promises to be controversial among conservative Hindus. MC is
considered a marker of religious identity since Muslims routinely
circumcise their male children, and Hindus do not. It has been
suggested that at times, circumcision status may even have been used to
identify people`s religious affiliation during communal riots.
Popular wisdom holds that even the mention of MC in some communities
will trigger sectarian violence. Predictably, some opponents have
argued that the greater good of society must be protected by
withholding information about MC from the population.

This is a joke, surely?

They wont tell the benefits of circumcision because they want to use it to identify Muslims?

Related articles :

Categories: India Tags: ,
  1. March 25, 2010 at 1:36 am

    This article is an example of the lousiest kind of journalism, no research and half-baked ideas presented as facts. Penile cancer is one of the rarest forms of cancer, preventable and treatable, rarer that breast cancer in men so it would make more sense to cut the pectoral muscles from men’s chest to prevent breast cancer than cut off the foreskin to prevent penile cancer. Utter nonsense.

    Urinary tract infections are treatable without amputation, certainly we don’t cut genital tissue from girls to prevent UTI’s there is no excuse for doing that to boys.

    Look behind every circumcision promotion campaign and you will find those who have been abused in this way promoting circumcision for so called “health benefits.” Circumcision is medical fraud. Circumcision of fully informed consenting adults is one matter, circumcision of infants and children is another, its called child abuse.

  2. Mark Lyndon
    March 25, 2010 at 3:14 am

    Circumcision is a dangerous distraction in the fight against AIDS. There are six African countries where men are *more* likely to be HIV+ if they’ve been circumcised: Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Swaziland. Eg in Malawi, the HIV rate is 13.2% among circumcised men, but only 9.5% among intact men. In Rwanda, the HIV rate is 3.5% among circumcised men, but only 2.1% among intact men. If circumcision really worked against AIDS, this just wouldn’t happen. We now have people calling circumcision a “vaccine” or “invisible condom”, and viewing circumcision as an alternative to condoms. The South African National Communication Survey on HIV/AIDS, 2009 found that 15% of adults across age groups “believe that circumcised men do not need to use condoms”.

    The one randomized controlled trial into male-to-female transmission showed a 54% higher rate in the group where the men had been circumcised btw.

    ABC (Abstinence, Being faithful, Condoms) is the way forward. Promoting genital surgery will cost lives, not save them.

  3. August 9, 2011 at 2:27 am

    ……….. Are laws against circumcision such a dubious idea? Is the idea that a male has the right to his own body such an injustice?

    Many Jews do support such alternative ceremonies.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: