Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 7
Posted: 1/6/2010 12:26:08 PM EDT
It was brought up in another thread and I'm wondering what Arfcom's opinion is.

The best I could tell from the earlier argument is:

Good: hygiene, convenience, 'beauty'
Bad: loss of nerves, possible injury, loss of protection from clothes chafing



poll inbound
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:29:51 PM EDT
Oh Magurgle, this thread is for you !
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:30:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 12:32:28 PM EDT by an_hero]
My parents did it to me and honestly I kind of dislike the fact that they were such thoughtless dolts that they thought it was necessary. Typical democrats I guess.

As a Gentile, I believe my God intended me to have a foreskin.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:32:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 12:32:55 PM EDT by peekay]
It should be up to the individual. Don't chop up your kid's dick fresh out of the box, K?

And in before the dumb fucks that don't know how to use soap.

Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:32:55 PM EDT
You guys seem sure interested in dicks.

Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:33:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By an_hero:
My parents did it to me and honestly I kind of dislike the fact that they were such thoughtless dolts that they thought it was necessary. Typical democrats I guess.

As a Gentile, I believe my God intended me to have a foreskin.


Seems to me that God intended everyone to have one, Gentile or not. Seeing as we're all born with one.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:34:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By skygod:
You guys seem sure interested in dicks.



Just my own, homie. Don't project!
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:34:17 PM EDT
More gun forum topic on the cock.

Ask me how I know you are gay.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:34:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By an_hero:
My parents did it to me and honestly I kind of dislike the fact that they were such thoughtless dolts that they thought it was necessary. Typical democrats I guess.

As a Gentile, I believe my God intended me to have a foreskin.


It seems like a major procedure to have done without someone's consent. And people recoil at that butchering they do to women's junk in Africa. Seems hypocritical, even if what they do to chicks over there is worse.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:34:38 PM EDT
Needs less pole
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:35:06 PM EDT
If it aint broke, Don't fix it.

I am not buying the more hygenic argument either.. Just wash your johnson!

but yes, It happened to me too.. Those bastards.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:35:21 PM EDT
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.

Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:35:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By macman37:
Needs less pole

What you did there...I see it.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:35:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 12:37:33 PM EDT by an_hero]
Originally Posted By Eric802:
Originally Posted By an_hero:
My parents did it to me and honestly I kind of dislike the fact that they were such thoughtless dolts that they thought it was necessary. Typical democrats I guess.

As a Gentile, I believe my God intended me to have a foreskin.


Seems to me that God intended everyone to have one, Gentile or not. Seeing as we're all born with one.


I don't know if my shit was done wrong or not, but I've never been able to ejaculate during intercourse. Gee thanks maw and paw for assuming those nerve endings wouldn't be useful.

Originally Posted By amd_dude:
Originally Posted By an_hero:
My parents did it to me and honestly I kind of dislike the fact that they were such thoughtless dolts that they thought it was necessary. Typical democrats I guess.

As a Gentile, I believe my God intended me to have a foreskin.


It seems like a major procedure to have done without someone's consent. And people recoil at that butchering they do to women's junk in Africa. Seems hypocritical, even if what they do to chicks over there is worse.


Elective surgery should always be avoided if possible.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:36:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By rike:
More gun forum topic on the cock.

Ask me how I know you are gay.


Its a gun forum, We like to talk about our equipment.



"this is my rifle, this is my gun!... this is for fighting, this is for fun!"
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:36:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:37:21 PM EDT
Jew.
I am one.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:38:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.



... and your avatar..
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:38:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.


Not fucking dirty harlots is another way to avoid those things.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:39:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 12:40:24 PM EDT by Beretta92F]
Originally Posted By an_hero:
Originally Posted By Eric802:
Originally Posted By an_hero:
My parents did it to me and honestly I kind of dislike the fact that they were such thoughtless dolts that they thought it was necessary. Typical democrats I guess.

As a Gentile, I believe my God intended me to have a foreskin.


Seems to me that God intended everyone to have one, Gentile or not. Seeing as we're all born with one.


I don't know if my shit was done wrong or not, but I've never been able to ejaculate during intercourse. Gee thanks maw and paw for assuming those nerve endings wouldn't be useful.



same here. if I'm wearing a condom, it's just *not* going to happen. sure wish I had a choice in the matter.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:39:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.

As opposed to the open hole at the end of your dick. Right.


Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:39:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..
But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.

That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.

i read of a study that circumcised men are less likely to transmit HIV
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:40:38 PM EDT
Here is a post of mine from the other thread.


What is lost to circumcision


When a baby boy's natural and intact penis is "circumcised," this is what is lost forever:

*1. The frenar band of soft ridges––the single most pleasure producing zone on the male body. Loss of this densely innervated and reactive belt of tissue reduces the sensitivity of the remaining penis to about that of ordinary skin.

2. Approximately half of the temperature reactive smooth muscle sheath called the dartos fascia.

3. Specialized epithelial Langerhans cells, a component of the immune system.

*4. An estimated 240 feet of microscopic nerves, including branches of the dorsal nerve.

*5. Between 10,000 to 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which can discern slight motion, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture. This loss includes thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called the Meissner's corpuscles - the most important sensory component in the foreskin.

6. Estrogen receptors the purpose and value of which are not yet fully understood.

*7. More than 50% of the mobile penile skin, the multi-purpose covering of the glans, that shields all of the specialized penile skin from abrasion, drying, and callusing (by keratin cell layering), and protects it from dirt and other contaminants. The debilitating sexual consequences of keratinizing the glans have never been studied.

8. The immunological defense system of the soft mucosa, which may produce antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as lysozyme, also found in mothers milk, and plasma cells, which secrete immunoglobulin antibodies.

9. Lymphatic vessels, the loss of which interrupts the lymph flow within a part of the bodys immune system.

*10. The frenulum, the very sensitive "V" shaped web-like tethering structure on the underside of the glans; usually amputated along with the foreskin, or severed, which destroys its functionality.

*11. The apocrine glands of the inner foreskin, which produce pheromones—nature's powerful, silent, invisible behavioral signals to potential sexual partners. They contribute significantly to sexuality. Their loss is unstudied.

12. Ectopic sebaceous glands, which lubricate and moisturize.

*13. The essential "gliding" mechanism. If unfolded and spread out flat, the average adult foreskin measures about 15 square inches, the size of a postcard. This abundance of specialized, self-lubricating mobile skin gives the natural penis its unique hallmark ability to smoothly "glide" in and out within itself—permitting natural non-abrasive masturbation and intercourse, without drying out the vagina or requiring artificial lubricants.

14. The pink to red to dark purple natural coloration of the glans, normally an internal organ, like the tongue.

*15. A significant amount of the penis circumference because its double layered wrapping of loose foreskin is now missing making the circumcised penis defectively thinner than a full-sized intact penis.

*16. As much as one inch of the erect penis length due to amputation when the connective tissue is torn apart during "circumcision." This shared membrane tightly fuses the foreskin and the glans together while the penis develops. Ripping it apart wounds the glans, leaving it raw and subject to infection, scarring, and shrinkage.

*17. Several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery and branches of the dorsal artery. The loss of this dense vascularity interrupts normal blood flow to the shaft and glans of the penis, obviously damaging its natural function and possibly stunting its complete and healthy development.

18. Every year boys lose their penises altogether from botched "circumcisions" and infections accidents happen. They are then "sexually reassigned" by transgender surgery and must live their lives as females.

19. Every year many boys lose their lives from the complications of medically unnecessary circumcisions. The cause of these deaths are a fact the billion dollar per year circumcision industry willfully obscures and conceals.

*20. Although not yet proved scientifically, there is considerable new evidence that an incomplete penis loses its capacity for the subtle electromagnetic "cross-communication" that occurs only during contact between two mucous membranes, and which contributes to the perception of sexual ecstasy. In other words, medically unjustified foreskin amputation of boys ultimately diminishes the intensity of orgasms for both men and women!

Gary L. Harryman,
14 February 1999
glharryman@aol.com




Guide for parents

http://www.cirp.org/
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:41:32 PM EDT
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:42:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 12:45:26 PM EDT by navvet89]
IBTEW. (in before the emotional whackos)

eta: too late
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:43:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?

Congrats on butchering your child without his permission. Could you buy some soap instead of chopping his sex organ up?

Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:44:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?

Congrats on butchering your child without his permission. Could you buy some soap instead of chopping his sex organ up?


MYOB
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:44:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?

Congrats on butchering your child without his permission. Could you buy some soap instead of chopping his sex organ up?



So do you guys line up at the hospital and protest all the butchering going on?

Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:44:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


It increases the risk to females because the little HPV critters have more places to hide.

It also increases the risk of penile cancer in men, substantially if you look at it in terms of the percentage INCREASE. However if you look at it in terms of raw numbers, or segment of population affected, the increase isn't that big a deal.


If my parents had removed all of my toenails at birth, I never would have gotten that nasty ingrown toenail and associated infection. And I would have lived a happy, well adjusted life. I don't really "need" them...


In a former life, I was somewhat of an expert on this topic, and I could sit in here typing stuff about it all day.


I'll just leave you with this: I once interviewed a physician who claimed he had performed "more circumcisions than anyone alive in the city." He allowed me to be a guest to observe the procedures. We had a long talk about the pro's and cons, he was actually opposed to circs but societal pressure kept them going and all that jazz.

The best quote I got from him was "Nature is seldom wrong"



Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:45:13 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:45:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 12:51:06 PM EDT by Magurgle]
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.


false
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/


Cross-sectional studies. Cross-sectional studies have been carried out in the United States,9 the United Kingdom,14 and Australia16 to determine the effects of circumcision upon STDs. All studies have found no significant effect of circumcision on the incidence of STD. Laumann et al. reported that circumcised men are slightly more likely to have both a bacterial and a viral STD in their lifetime.9 The British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles reported that circumcised males have slightly more STDs but the difference was not judged to be statistically significant.14 Richters et al. found that non-circumcised men are slightly more likely to have penile candidiasis (yeast).17

Conclusion. The evidence does not support non-therapeutic circumcision to prevent STD infection. On balance, non-circumcision is to be preferred because of the freedom from complications and other adverse effects.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:45:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By InjunJoe:

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?

Congrats on butchering your child without his permission. Could you buy some soap instead of chopping his sex organ up?


MYOB

This is still an internet forum correct? Which he just posted on?

Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:46:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.

As opposed to the open hole at the end of your dick. Right.



Like it or not, that's what the epidemiological studies show:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm

Compared with the dry external skin surface, the inner mucosa of the foreskin has less keratinization (deposition of fibrous protein), a higher density of target cells for HIV infection (Langerhans cells), and is more susceptible to HIV infection than other penile tissue in laboratory studies [2]. The foreskin may also have greater susceptibility to traumatic epithelial disruptions (tears) during intercourse, providing a portal of entry for pathogens, including HIV [3]. In addition, the microenvironment in the preputial sac between the unretracted foreskin and the glans penis may be conducive to viral survival [1]. Finally, the higher rates of sexually transmitted genital ulcerative disease, such as syphilis, observed in uncircumcised men may also increase susceptibility to HIV infection [4].

A systematic review and meta-analysis that focused on male circumcision and heterosexual transmission of HIV in Africa was published in 2000 [5]. It included 19 cross-sectional studies, 5 case-control studies, 3 cohort studies, and 1 partner study. A substantial protective effect of male circumcision on risk for HIV infection was noted, along with a reduced risk for genital ulcer disease. After adjustment for confounding factors in the population-based studies, the relative risk for HIV infection was 44% lower in circumcised men. The strongest association was seen in men at high risk, such as patients at sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics, for whom the adjusted relative risk was 71% lower for circumcised men.





Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:46:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By skygod:

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?

Congrats on butchering your child without his permission. Could you buy some soap instead of chopping his sex organ up?



So do you guys line up at the hospital and protest all the butchering going on?


Do you line up to chop up baby dicks?

Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:47:15 PM EDT
Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?

Congrats on butchering your child without his permission. Could you buy some soap instead of chopping his sex organ up?



Yes, that's what it is.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:47:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?


None what so ever
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:48:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Magurgle:
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.


Completely false
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/


Cross-sectional studies. Cross-sectional studies have been carried out in the United States,9 the United Kingdom,14 and Australia16 to determine the effects of circumcision upon STDs. All studies have found no significant effect of circumcision on the incidence of STD. Laumann et al. reported that circumcised men are slightly more likely to have both a bacterial and a viral STD in their lifetime.9 The British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles reported that circumcised males have slightly more STDs but the difference was not judged to be statistically significant.14 Richters et al. found that non-circumcised men are slightly more likely to have penile candidiasis (yeast).17

Conclusion. The evidence does not support non-therapeutic circumcision to prevent STD infection. On balance, non-circumcision is to be preferred because of the freedom from complications and other adverse effects.

CDC and WHO say otherwise. But whatever.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:48:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RarestRX:

Circumcision Gives Men up to 60% HIV Protection

Works for me.


And a condom is even more effective, but not fucking chicks with AIDS is 100% effective.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:49:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By skygod:

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By clivus:
I just had my son's done. I think the hygiene issues make it worthwhile.

I've talked to many women that have never seen an uncircumcised penis. Have you guys (uncircumcised) had any bad reactions in that arena?

Congrats on butchering your child without his permission. Could you buy some soap instead of chopping his sex organ up?



So do you guys line up at the hospital and protest all the butchering going on?


Do you line up to chop up baby dicks?


Obviously not, but you dont see me sniveling about what other people do with their kids.

So is a Urologist a butcher of children then? You guys should throw them in jail.


Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:49:59 PM EDT
this thread is going to come to a head
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:50:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 12:51:19 PM EDT by kill-9]

Originally Posted By peekay:

Do you line up to chop up baby dicks?


Wow, this thread went off the rails in a hurry.




Originally Posted By IMHerDad:
this thread is going to come to a head



Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:51:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.

As opposed to the open hole at the end of your dick. Right.



Like it or not, that's what the epidemiological studies show:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm

Compared with the dry external skin surface, the inner mucosa of the foreskin has less keratinization (deposition of fibrous protein), a higher density of target cells for HIV infection (Langerhans cells), and is more susceptible to HIV infection than other penile tissue in laboratory studies [2]. The foreskin may also have greater susceptibility to traumatic epithelial disruptions (tears) during intercourse, providing a portal of entry for pathogens, including HIV [3]. In addition, the microenvironment in the preputial sac between the unretracted foreskin and the glans penis may be conducive to viral survival [1]. Finally, the higher rates of sexually transmitted genital ulcerative disease, such as syphilis, observed in uncircumcised men may also increase susceptibility to HIV infection [4].

A systematic review and meta-analysis that focused on male circumcision and heterosexual transmission of HIV in Africa was published in 2000 [5]. It included 19 cross-sectional studies, 5 case-control studies, 3 cohort studies, and 1 partner study. A substantial protective effect of male circumcision on risk for HIV infection was noted, along with a reduced risk for genital ulcer disease. After adjustment for confounding factors in the population-based studies, the relative risk for HIV infection was 44% lower in circumcised men. The strongest association was seen in men at high risk, such as patients at sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics, for whom the adjusted relative risk was 71% lower for circumcised men.







I'm not trying to sound like a smart-ass with this post (even though I usually am a smart-ass) but...that study was done in Africa. I wonder how similar the infection rates would be a.) in a less tropical environment and b.) where almost the entire male population showered with soap everyday - like Europe or North America. Are there any studies done on rates of disease in Europe or America/Canada?
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:51:34 PM EDT
I'm more interested in the question of female circumcision. I don't understand why one is good, and the other is somehow abhorrent.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:51:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By valhalla:
Originally Posted By RarestRX:

Circumcision Gives Men up to 60% HIV Protection

Works for me.


And a condom is even more effective, but not fucking chicks with AIDS is 100% effective.

Fixed.

And when did they start mandating tattoos on HIV-infected women? How are you going to know she has AIDS?
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:51:50 PM EDT
The frenar band of soft ridges––the single most pleasure producing zone on the male body. Loss of this densely innervated and reactive belt of tissue reduces the sensitivity of the remaining penis to about that of ordinary skin.


So what you're saying is that us cut guys last longer.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:52:30 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Magurgle:
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.


Completely false
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/


Cross-sectional studies. Cross-sectional studies have been carried out in the United States,9 the United Kingdom,14 and Australia16 to determine the effects of circumcision upon STDs. All studies have found no significant effect of circumcision on the incidence of STD. Laumann et al. reported that circumcised men are slightly more likely to have both a bacterial and a viral STD in their lifetime.9 The British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles reported that circumcised males have slightly more STDs but the difference was not judged to be statistically significant.14 Richters et al. found that non-circumcised men are slightly more likely to have penile candidiasis (yeast).17

Conclusion. The evidence does not support non-therapeutic circumcision to prevent STD infection. On balance, non-circumcision is to be preferred because of the freedom from complications and other adverse effects.

CDC and WHO say otherwise. But whatever.


either way condoms pretty much make both sides of the argument moot when it comes to STDs
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:52:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By valhalla:
Originally Posted By RarestRX:

Circumcision Gives Men up to 60% HIV Protection

Works for me.


And a condom is even more effective, but not fucking chicks with AIDS is 100% effective.

Fixed.

And when did they start mandating tattoos on HIV-infected women? How are you going to know she has AIDS?

There's a new technology, you give a testing company some blood and they give you a result. Kinda cool.



Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:53:04 PM EDT
I think its a good thing, I don't know why? yes I'm circumcised. But I'm pissed because I want one of those parties that the Jewish people get and I want my foreskin back, for a proper burial.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:55:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By StandardDeviation:
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By peekay:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By 2theLeft:
Sex with an uncircumcised man is a risk factor for cervical cancer in women.. I have NO IDEA why..

But, I'm in on page one of a dick thread, go figure.


That's because uncircumcised men are more likely to get STDs, including HPV. The foreskin provides a nice warm moist place for the virus to hang out until it can start the infection.

As opposed to the open hole at the end of your dick. Right.



Like it or not, that's what the epidemiological studies show:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm

Compared with the dry external skin surface, the inner mucosa of the foreskin has less keratinization (deposition of fibrous protein), a higher density of target cells for HIV infection (Langerhans cells), and is more susceptible to HIV infection than other penile tissue in laboratory studies [2]. The foreskin may also have greater susceptibility to traumatic epithelial disruptions (tears) during intercourse, providing a portal of entry for pathogens, including HIV [3]. In addition, the microenvironment in the preputial sac between the unretracted foreskin and the glans penis may be conducive to viral survival [1]. Finally, the higher rates of sexually transmitted genital ulcerative disease, such as syphilis, observed in uncircumcised men may also increase susceptibility to HIV infection [4].

A systematic review and meta-analysis that focused on male circumcision and heterosexual transmission of HIV in Africa was published in 2000 [5]. It included 19 cross-sectional studies, 5 case-control studies, 3 cohort studies, and 1 partner study. A substantial protective effect of male circumcision on risk for HIV infection was noted, along with a reduced risk for genital ulcer disease. After adjustment for confounding factors in the population-based studies, the relative risk for HIV infection was 44% lower in circumcised men. The strongest association was seen in men at high risk, such as patients at sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics, for whom the adjusted relative risk was 71% lower for circumcised men.







I'm not trying to sound like a smart-ass with this post (even though I usually am a smart-ass) but...that study was done in Africa. I wonder how similar the infection rates would be a.) in a less tropical environment and b.) where almost the entire male population showered with soap everyday - like Europe or North America. Are there any studies done on rates of disease in Europe or America/Canada?

Follow the link, and ye shall receive:

A number of important differences from sub- Saharan African settings where the three male circumcision trials were conducted must be considered in determining the possible role for male circumcision in HIV prevention in the United States. Notably, the overall risk of HIV infection is considerably lower in the United States, changing risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness considerations. Also, studies to date have demonstrated efficacy only for penile-vaginal sex, the predominant mode of HIV transmission in Africa, whereas the predominant mode of sexual HIV transmission in the United States is by penile-anal sex among MSM. There are as yet no convincing data to help determine whether male circumcision will have any effect on HIV risk for men who engage in anal sex with either a female or male partner, as either the insertive or receptive partner. Receptive anal sex is associated with a substantially greater risk of HIV acquisition than is insertive anal sex. It is more biologically plausible that male circumcision would reduce HIV acquisition risk for the insertive partner rather than for the receptive partner, but few MSM engage solely in insertive anal sex [40].

In addition, although the prevalence of circumcision may be somewhat lower in U.S. racial and ethnic groups with higher rates of HIV infection, most American men are already circumcised, and it is not known whether men at higher risk for HIV infection would be willing to be circumcised or whether parents would be willing to have their infants circumcised to reduce possible future HIV infection risk. Lastly, whether the effect of male circumcision differs by HIV-1 subtype, predominately subtype B in the United States and subtypes A, C, and D in circulation at the three clinical trial sites in Africa, is also unknown.


In short, they haven't done many studies here, partly because so many men are already circumcised.
Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:56:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2010 1:05:15 PM EDT by fiver]

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

CDC and WHO say otherwise. But whatever.


I am aware of all of those reports.

It is factually correct that high risk sex with an uncircumcised penis is more likely to lead to transmission of diseae than a circumcised penis. You don't even need a study to prove this, you can just sit and think about the biology for a few seconds.

Circumcision is an effective disease control measure, but only the absence of sexual hygiene practices that don't involve genital modification.



Link Posted: 1/6/2010 12:56:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Subnet:
I'm more interested in the question of female circumcision. I don't understand why one is good, and the other is somehow abhorrent.

Female circumcision, as practiced in some Muslim countries, is roughly equivalent to cutting your dick off.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 7
Top Top