Circumcision 'helps to halt HIV'

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

buffalo

Guest
Circumcision ‘helps to halt HIV’

New research suggests circumcision could be effective in preventing the spread of HIV among men. The study of more than 3,000 men in South Africa was done by the French agency for Aids and Viral Hepatitis.

The data, outlined at a conference in Brazil, shows male circumcision prevented about seven of 10 infections.

UN health agencies have cautioned that more trials are necessary before they will recommend this as a method to protect against Aids.

Previous studies have suggested that men who are circumcised have a lower rate of HIV infection.

more…
 
**hmm…guess it is a good thing both my boys have circumcisions:) **
 
Of course, marital monogamy is the best way to prevent infection.
 
Monogamy if married, abstinence if not. Abstinence is 100% effective and is totally free.
 
Right now the AMA is against infant circumcision. We got our boy circumcised so he would look like his Dad.
 
40.png
bapcathluth:
Right now the AMA is against infant circumcision. We got our boy circumcised so he would look like his Dad.
Click to expand...
I wonder why??? We have seen this as a growing trend among our friends that are having kids though…they do not circumcise their sons (even though the dads are). My understanding is that it is even more painful to have this done as an adult than as an infant.
 
40.png
Karin:
I wonder why??? We have seen this as a growing trend among our friends that are having kids though…they do not circumcise their sons (even though the dads are). My understanding is that it is even more painful to have this done as an adult than as an infant.
Click to expand...
My gut feeling is that this trend is a mistake. Maybe the Israelites knew more than we give them credit for.
 
40.png
geezerbob:
Monogamy if married, abstinence if not. Abstinence is 100% effective and is totally free.
Click to expand...
60 Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?”-Jn6
 
People in the UK look on with confusion at things like this.

No-one gets circumcised in the UK (apart from Jews) unless it is medically necessary. (I suppose if you felt very very strongly about it, it may be possible to get it done, but basically no-one does).

Mike
 
I’m a nurse in the newborn nursery who assists at circumcisions. Yuck - poor babies! I have heard all the arguments for it - it still seems a mean thing to do to a babe. He may need his tonsils or appendix out later in life too - should we rip them out now, just in case? How about tattoos? Why not, if daddy has them? Let’s pierce his tongue too, while we’re at it.
 
I have a better Idea…Clean living, no IV drug use, No homosexual relations, Abstinence for singles, and monogamy in marriage is almost 100 percent effective.:hmmm:
 
40.png
nan:
He may need his tonsils or appendix out later in life too - should we rip them out now, just in case? How about tattoos? Why not, if daddy has them? Let’s pierce his tongue too, while we’re at it.
Click to expand...
Or, let’s toss out some nonsense and try to pass it off as relevant to the thread!

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Is it true that Muslims have circumcisions older? I thought I heard that Muslim boys get circumcisions at age 13.

OUCH!!! :eek:
 
40.png
JimG:
My gut feeling is that this trend is a mistake. Maybe the Israelites knew more than we give them credit for.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind, male circumcisions done today, both by Jews and by American doctors, are much different from those done in biblical times. Originally, only the tip of the foreskin (the part which, in an infant, could be freely separated from the glans with no tearing of membranes) was removed, leaving most of the glans covered. The current procedure, in which the foreskin is removed entirely, with more negative side effects and a greater risk of complications, was introduced around A.D. 100, and has no scriptural precedent. (Circumcisions as commonly practiced in America since the mid 20th century have been done by varying methods, but the end result of them is the exact same as the modern Bris.)

Anyway, from a microbiological standpoint, it seems quite possible that modern circumcision might reduce the chance of HIV transmission. However, there are apparently some doubts about the study in question - the medical journal The Lancet refused to publish it. Regardless, even if this does reduce the chance of transmission, it’s not likely to reduce the overall infection rate. Just like the promotion of condoms, whenever something is advertised as reducing the risk of infection, it will prompt many to engage in more risky behaviors.

In the end, nothing but monogamy between two uninfected individuals (preferably in marriage, of course) is going to eliminate the risk of HIV infection.
 
If I had a son, I wouldn’t do it, simply because it is the boys body part, not my own and I am not going to take away something he may (or may not) miss later on in his life.

Besides the point is moot, be abstinant or be monogimous. Don’t engage in homosexual activity and don’t do drugs.
 
40.png
Tom444:
However, there are apparently some doubts about the study in question - the medical journal The Lancet refused to publish it.
Click to expand...
Some of these doctors make me wonder…NO ONE should enjoy cutting on someone- and I’ve heard pediatricians talk about it casually and jokingly- like it’s fun. I think a lot of the support for circumcision is pushed by pharmaceutical companies (who push hospitals, and they together push doctors’ offices) so they can get paid for it- there is money in circumcision- especially if the mother doesn’t use pain relievers for the birth, and the baby is born without problems- and in the case of home births, the circumcision may be the only thing they get money from. I think it is very unethical to circumcize a child. I would applaud the illegalization of it. I will never have it done to my sons (if I have any). There can be complications from it. There are hygeinic advantages to having it done, I suppose, but people can learn how to clean themselves- it’s not that difficult. This should be a decision for adults to make for themselves- not for parents to make for their children. I have changed diapers on babies who have just been circumcized- I can see quite clearly that it was very painful. I have spoken to men who deeply resent being circumcized- this would have never been an issue had it been their choice.
 
David B:
Is it true that Muslims have circumcisions older? I thought I heard that Muslim boys get circumcisions at age 13.

OUCH!!! :eek:
Click to expand...
Hmm, one David B to another :eek:

It varies from culture to culture.

In Turkey it’s done on the 8th day, like the Jews.

In Morocco (saw this in a movie), it’s don’t at about the age of 5 (big deal made of it, lots of presents for the boy, etc.

One tribe on the Arabian peninsula had the boy standing there at the age of 13, with his intended bride in front of him, while they peel (not cut) all the skin (not just the foreskin) off. He is supposed to be brandishing a dagger and “shouting with a mighty joy.” If the intended bride detects any fear or cowardice in him, she is allowed to reject the planned marriage.

(Frankly, if someone were doing that to me, putting a dagger in my hand would be the WRONG idea!!! :bigyikes: )

DaveBj
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top