I have heard things on the news and on the internet about men who are circumsized being less likely to have HIV/AIDS. Maybe I'm wrong about the whole thing, I don't know. Any thoughts on this subject?
2006-12-19 08:37:47 · 4 answers · asked by Nisi 4 in Health ➔ Diseases & Conditions ➔ STDs
I don't particularly believe this I was just wondering everyone's idea's on the thought. In my microbiology class I was taught that men and women can both contract the virus dispite being circumsized, but than again who knows?
2006-12-19 15:05:39 · update #1
Again I mean circumsized for men.
2006-12-19 15:06:13 · update #2
it's just statistics. it doesn't mean if you get your penis chopped up, you won't get AIDS. use your head! it's a disease that you get from having sex. either don't have sex, or use protection ALWAYS! there are a lot of nasty hoes out there, and NONE of them are worth a life threatening disease. peace out!
2006-12-19 08:43:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not a religious person, but it has been said that God made man in his own image, and that we are perfect. I know circumcision is a Christian ritual as well, which is pretty hypocritical. If it was normal to be circumcised, then boys would be born that way. Anyway it is purely supposition and theory and is absolutely ridiculous in my opinion. You contract HIV/AIDS from being exposed to contaminated bodily fluids, not whether you are circumcised or not. Maybe the people who are spreading these stupid ideas have done their studies in a limited environment, with their studies being in the younger age group. The practice of male circumcision is not considered needed with babies born today, and most doctors will not do the operation unless it is a specific religious belief the parents have, so maybe because more babies are being left their foreskins means that the majority of men these days are not circumcised, so it stands to reason you will find more AIDS sufferers within the non circumcised groups than circumcised because of the belief that circumcision is now not necessary...you will find there are more men that have not been circumcised, and soon men who have been circumcised will be in the distinct minority.
Dont believe such foolish theories...it is not based on anything more than theory, and from where I am sitting these theories have nothing factual to base these findings out on.
2006-12-19 10:16:07 · answer #2 · answered by rightio 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The part of the skin that gets cut off in a circumcision is a type of skin that HIV can use to enter the body (called a mucus membrane). Remove it and it becomes more difficult for HIV to enter the body during vaginal intercourse. The study that was done pretty much proved it beyond a doubt.
2006-12-19 11:26:13 · answer #3 · answered by Brad 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that is wrong.
2006-12-19 11:08:17 · answer #4 · answered by leoslady3900 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋