circumcision?

Question

circumcision (sunnath) being done widely among Muslims is scientifically proven to be effective ?

Answer 1

It is effective for reducing sexual pleasure in men and in their female partners. It is so effective that many mutilated men have trouble reaching orgasm from normal sexual relations, and their wives/partners also have a significantly reduced level of orgasm. It is not effective in reducing masturbation or extra-marital sex, because sexual desire comes from hormones, not from the penis. It is not more hygienic unless the man never washes his privates. It is probably ineffective in reducing transmission of disease, and condoms or fidelity work much better anyway. It is highly effective in making money for doctors.

Answer 2

Depends what for. It's also been proven to be effective in causing negative side effects, so we really need to know what you're talking about in terms of it being effective.

Circumcision is a mostly Jewish and Muslim thing, with a slight majority of Americans boys (only advanced nation that does it at birth on a big scale) also done. However, America's rates have fallen a lot, in some states circumcision is as low as 14%, so times are changing.
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/staterates2004/

It's also been "scientifically proven" by various studies to reduce sensitivity/pleasure in the long run (since the nerves on the head always rub when it's bare) and makes masturbation more difficult (probably because the foreskin is already lubricated). There's plenty of other risks, of course. I guess that's why the USA is the last advanced nation to do it a lot... after all, it was made popular here by claiming that it prevented masturbation thanks to Dr. Kellogg...
http://forums.govteen.com/showpost.php?p=3069995&postcount=2

As far as STDs and HIV/AIDS go, it all depends on your sexual lifestyle. If you have multiple partners and don't use protection, you put yourself in risk. For example, the United States has the highest rates of circumcision in the industrialized world and still have the highest HIV/AIDS infections. That's using CIA statistics:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2155rank.html

And as far as STDs go, studies have leaned both ways. Europeans and Japanese are uncircumcised and they aren't having any more STD problems than we are.
http://www.menweb.org/msnbcirc.htm

Girls are now being vaccinated against cervical cancer, let's hope for more achievements like that.
http://www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/results/cervical-cancer-vaccine1102

Answer 3

Male circumcision or female genital mutilation?

proven effective against what?

Your question is vague & incomplete. If you add more detail I may respond.

*******
So I googled sunnath & found out you're referring to male cirmucision, also known as a bris in jewish culture.

Circumcision is a centuries old tradition which has been shown to have contradictary results when the sexual & emotional health of both uncercumcised & cercumcised men have been studied.

Many people believe it is a barbaric custom, whether deemed medical or religious... and many people who are of a secular mind, have the operation performed because of a concern for aesthetics (if most boys in his class are cut, he may be teased if he is not cut)

There are men who have even stretched out the skin around the head of their penis with weights in order to regain a foreskin-like flap of flesh.

Answer 4

Large scale clinical studies have proven that men who are not circumcised have a much greater potential for sexually transmitted diseases then circumcised males.

The studies clearly prove that the circumcised male has less chance of contacting any sort of STD than the non-circumcised male.

Older clinical studies found that men who had wives that died of cancer of the cervix, when they remarried found that their second wife came down also with cervical cancer. The statistics were very strongly indicating that those men carried a factor that was transmitted to the second wife.

Now with the new HPV-16 vaccine out by Merck it is clear that those men carried a virus that reinfected their second wife.

The concept that the non-circumcised male has a much greater potential for transmitting STDs is now understood and believed to be one of the major causes of STDs in different parts of the world.

To answer your question about circumcision: Yes it is proven scientifically to be effective in reducing sexually transmitted diseases in males.

Answer 5

1. Male circumcision: Some times the fore skin does not slide back. This will cause health problems and pain during sex. for this, doctors recommend circumcision. Circumcision helps to keep the male sexual organ clean. According to doctors, circumcisioned males are less likely to get AIDS. How? I have not come across convincing reply. Circumcision helps for increased libido. Due to the circumcision in early childhood, the tip of the penis becomes insensitive due to constant rubbing to the under garments. The man is able to hold longer due to this insensitivity.
2. Female circumcision: Some cults are practising this. This is nothing but torture and killing the lady's sexual urge. She will never know what is orgasm. Her job will be just to perform the duty and satisfy her man without herself enjoying the act.

Answer 6

Yes it is effective!

The jews*, muslims* and the u.s.* are always pissed off about something and going to war about everything. So if that is what you want then yes it is effective.

*(I circumcised these words, so now they can not start with capital letters anymore)

Answer 7

Effective at what?
The answer is no if it's in any way pertaining to health.
Before I tell you why, just one quick note on the Kuran:
"[circumcision] practices violate the Koran: "Our Lord, You did not create all this in vain" (3:191), and "[He] perfected everything He created" (32:7)." [ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7731348&dopt=Abstract ]


Now for it's lack of effectivness with respect to hygeine.


It's perpetuated by culture, just as FGM in other areas and the majority of people who force it on their children do not know the true facts.


Parents should not have the right to force it on to their children. Should they have the right to circumcise girls? It is comparable to type 2 female circumcision (see below).
No medical institution in the developed world actually reccommends the practice.


Here is a video of the operation. Watch it if you want to learn more. Please do watch it.
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=352478&fr=ybr_sbc
It is not just a little snip here and there. Watch the above video of a circumcision in progress.

The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis and therefore very significant during sexual intercourse. Circumcision removes as much as 75% of sensation [ http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/bju_6685.pdf ].
The foreskin reduces the force required by the penis to enter the vagina. It also increases the sexual enjoyment of the female partner. Here is a study to back this up: http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/
The foreskin keeps the glans soft and moist and protects it from trauma and injury. Without this protection, the glans becomes dry, calloused, and desensitized from exposure and chafing.
Specialized nerve endings in the foreskin enhance sexual pleasure.
The foreskin may have functions not yet recognized or understood.

Performing circumcision on a child can and does result in the deaths of children due to blood loss and/or failure of the immune system.
It can and does result in very significant scaring.
It can and does result in sexual problems later in life.

Circumcised males have a much higher rate of sexual dysfunction.




A lot of the information perpetuated about it preventing diseases is false.
The study that you are less succeptible to aids if you are circumcised is flawed. Here is a discussion of the report and its methodology by "Doctors Opposing Circumcision": http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/HIVStatement.html . A condom is still required to prevent transmission of STI's.

Have a read through their statement. It is very informative. It shows the methodological flaws and poor conclusion in the report that the WHO has jumped upon. Everything is aptly sourced.

Men may often feel a need to justify their own circumcision by the generation of claims of health benefits.[ http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/goldman1/ ]
"The medical literature is full of protective claims for various diseases, such as sexually transmitted disease , male and female cancers, and urinary tract infection. All such claims have been disproved."[ http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/HIVStatement.html ]



"The United States has one of the highest rates of male circumcision and also one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the developed world, suggesting that circumcision is having exactly the opposite effect. Conversely, Finland and Japan have some of the lowest rates of circumcision and also some of the lowest rates of HIV/AIDS."
Condoms have been proven to be an effective means of combatting AIDS.
Are you aware that Stallings study also shows that female circumcision also reduces HIV transmission? [ http://www.ias-2005.org/planner/Abstracts.aspx?AID=3138 ]
Female circumcision type II is the removal of the prepuce, part of the clitoris and the labia. Because of the function of the male foreskin, male circumcision is comparable to type II female circumcision. [ http://www.mgmbill.org/mgm101.pps ]
Should we circumcise girls or is this practice different or is it that pne is "culturally" acceptable and one is not.
We do not nor should we circumcise girls.
They are both mutilations of the genitals. A parent does not have a right to mutilate their childs genitals by the following UN conventions: the U.N. Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the U.N. International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights. These violations were brought to the attention of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in 2001 both orally and in writing by NOCIRC. However, the U.N. has yet to take action. [ http://www.mgmbill.org/un.htm ]

The vast majority of the world(83%) is not circumcised.
There is no good reason to perform male genital mutilation.


See these sites specifically:
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/
http://www.mgmbill.org/
http://www.nocirc.org/
http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/
http://www.noharmm.org/

Here is a tracking of circumcision news articles which is kept very up to date:
http://www.cirp.org/news/

Have a look at this website:
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9712/23/circumcision.anesthetic/

Have a look at these videos:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=137650&fr=ybr_sbc
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1736954830543671382&sourceid=searchfeed

Answer 8

Effective for what? The foreskin protects the penis from all sorts of things. However, circumcision frees that head of the penis for easier entry, and makes it look bigger. It also makes the penis easier to clean. Keep in mind that you will be in pain for a few days after the procedure.

Answer 9

Effective in what manner? Do women lose the ability to have orgasims-yes.

Answer 10

Supposed to reduce the risk of HIV, yes