With the world health organisation suggesting circumcsion should we return to routine circumcision in the UK?

Question

Routine circumcision was popular in the UK until 1950 at about 33% nationally and 60% amongst the upper middle classes. As WHO is now suggesting it to prevent HIV should we return to routine circumcision in the UK? If not why not?

Answer 1

DEFINATELY. all these guys saying no its mutilation or abuse. it doesn't hurt (they use anesthetic in modern medicine, yes even on a newborn) and you don't lose sensitivity. well i haven't at least.
and how can something that most admit at least that looks better.

Answer 2

Absolutely not! The world health organization works with people around the globe and often times represents those populations who are at a disadvantage when it comes to clean/healthy standards of living. It cold be suggested that in remote areas where bathing standards are less than, well lets just say a bath is a luxury, then it may be said that in these extreme cases, circumcision could pose as a possible solution in rare instances where penile cleanliness is not taught regularly. However, this does not change the fact that whether one has a foreskin or not does not change the chances of HIV infection. The only thing that it may do is make the owner more concientious about how he uses it. I repeat, there is no corelation between whether or not a man has a foreskin and if he will get HIV. It doesn't matter how clean you keep it if you're going to put it somewhere where it can get dirty. Make sense?
Now, back to bringing circumcision back to a standard procedure in civilized country makes about as much sense as, well I can't think of anything that even has any credibility because chopping off a normal part of the body simply because one thinks it looks cleaner as a standard practice is just plain ignorant and abusive to the owner. Most men in America don't even know what they are missing because they are taught that chopping three miles of nerves and a protective cover off of man's most precious possesions is normal!!
Please think about this one a little bit more, do your homework and if anyone suggests bringing this barbaric practice back to the mainstream, check them into a psych ward please. (I'm not ruling out the the RARE situation where circumcision is a medical necessity, or those people who choose to practice it for religious reasons, but these are the exceptions, NOT the norm) I hope I don't mean to be on a soapbox here, but this is one area that people really need to be more educated on so that everyone can make an informed decision, not just a media driven, ignorant based assumption.
There is no reason for circumcision to ever be a part of standard procedure, EVER.

Answer 3

There are many differences between the UK and the parts of Africa where the (probably flawed) studies were done.

--In the UK there is a low starting rate of HIV, so the chances of a random sexual encounter being with an HIV-positive person are relatively low, not the astronomical odds in the study area, where sex with HIV-positve prostitutes is one of the main ways unmarried men release sexual tensions.
--In the UK condoms are culturally acceptable. Condoms cut HIV transmission by almost 100%, not the 1.8% decrease found with circumcision in the African study. And if men have a false sense of security from being cut, they are less likely to use the truly-effective condom.
--In the UK, most HIV is spread by means other than hetrosexual sex, which is the ONLY way circumcision is supposed to help.

The African study was small (a few thousand men) and ran for only two years. And the results that showed an INCREASE in HIV among newly-mutilated men were not announced with the fanfare of the "benefits" announcement, which twisted statistics to show some things that the raw data simply do not support.

No, we do not need to mutilate more babies. Even the US is starting to learn what a horrible idea it is. Yeah, the US cut almost all guys at birth for decades and still has the highest HIV rate in the developed world. What a strong argument for circumcision this "experiment" on millions of men turned out to be - NOT!

Answer 4

WHO is not suggesting routine circumcision in the UK, nor any part of the world really - not outright anyway. It's suggesting that circumcision should be offered as an option to consenting people (infants and children can't consent). Yet they state that the younger it's done, the greater the potential success, which seems paradoxical to their statement that it should be done with consent. Fact is, HIV/AIDS isn't nearly as bad in the UK as it is in parts of Africa and Asia, so routine circumcision will do very little against HIV/AIDS in the UK, so little as to not be worth it probably.

I had answered a previous question relating to this issue. Please see the link for the full answer.

Answer 5

No,we shouldn't.WHO has trumpeted that circumcision cuts the risk of HIV by more than 50% however,they have not given their latest findings much air time at all.In their latest report it was found that newly circumcised males had a far greater risk of contracting HIV than those who chose to remain uncut.Their irresponsibility will only ensure a surge in HIV,what they are doing is lulling those people into a false sense of security by saying that getting cut will help prevent the disease.It will NOT.Only abstinence will prevent the spread of HIV and because that is not feasable the next best thing is a condom.The WHO has not said that it prevents HIV they have said that it cuts the risk,however,unprotected sex by circumcised or uncircumcised men will lead to the same result,HIV and AIDS.Just look at the numbers in the U.S.A where almost all males are circumcised at birth.

Answer 6

there is not any scientific reason for this technique. it fairly is a non secular prepare and not a scientific necessity. It grew to alter into worry-unfastened prepare for the period of the enlistment of adult men interior the protection stress throughout the time of WW1. docs mentioned that it replaced into greater healthy and purifier together as interior the conflict field. The prepare between Christians replaced into born. merely interior the previous 2 many years has it exchange into socially perfect to no longer be circumcised. Circumcision is now cultural and not scientific.

Answer 7

I don't think circumcision should be a routine procedure. Parents should be free to make either the choice to circumcise or not to circumcise. However, I do agree that countries like the UK should take these new findings into account to promote this as an added measure to control the spread of HIV.
Circumcision is NOT mutilation, it's NOT damaging and it should be considered a simple, safe procedure parents may choose if they wish to give their sons this added protection.

Answer 8

You do realize that the US, the industrialized nation with the highest circumcision rate, has the highest HIV/AIDS rate. The ones with the lowest HIV/AIDS rate are those with the lowest circumcision rates, such as Scandinavia in Europe.
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2155rank.html

Also, I love how some of the posters lie in saying that is it not painful. Studies prove that it is:
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9712/23/circumcision.anesthetic/
http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/1f21e.htm

Also, brand new studies prove that it reduces sensitivity and masturbation/sex pleasure by a wide margin:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06646.x
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x

Above that, it carries many risks:
http://forums.govteen.com/showpost.php?p=3069995&postcount=2

Even in America circumcision is falling out of hand (finally) with rates as low as 14%):
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/staterates2004/

And the foreskin is helpful in many ways:
http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/
http://www.hachettebookgroupusa.com/books/70/0446678805/chapter_excerpt15690.html

It just takes a little bit of research. =)

As far as keeping it clean goes, I haven't had a problem with that. Perhaps in Africa or in ancient times it may have been, but now we shower. It only takes five to slide it back and rub the head; and it feels good. Nothing grows there if you do that, unless you don't wash for like a week or more, but that's true for females, too.

Answer 9

I don't think they should make it as a routine because there are many ways to prevent HIV than taking away someone's valuable part

Answer 10

Performing a medical procedure on someone who is unable to refuse is morally wrong, If I want to be circumcised it should be my desicion to make not the parents when a child is born

Answer 11

This is something that will always come down to the preference of the individual parents. It is the removal of part of persons body and can never be "routine" again.