2007-07-20 03:08:54 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health ➔ Men's Health
Total fiction. Of the men in the US that have contracted AIDS in the past 20 years, about 90% of them WERE circumcised. That is becuase circumcism was very popular then, with nearly all males being circumcised. Since in addition to AIDS there was also a big epidemic of gonnerhea in the '70s and '80s your statement is very false.
2007-07-20 04:19:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Supposedly circumcising is supposed to be for hygiene reasons. Easier to keep clean. Bacteria can grow inside and under the foreskin of an uncut penis if it's not kept clean. It can also develop an odor that some women are really turned off by. Modern hygiene habits have made circumcising less necessary. In most western countries especially the U.S. since about 1950 it is usual that most males are circumcised at birth. This is no longer the norm.
2007-07-20 10:20:44 · answer #2 · answered by ericbryce2 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Where in the hell did you get this statistic? This is the most blatantly false thing I have ever read. You need to learn more about STD's. They do not discriminate against uncircumsized men and circumcision has absolutely nothing to do with their transmission.
2007-07-20 10:18:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I have no idea where you got your statistical statement, but it simply is not true. Circumcision, while it is cleaner, does not prevent the transmission of STDs, only proper precautions can help to reduce the risk, but the only 100% sure way to prevent STD is abstinence.
2007-07-20 10:20:20 · answer #4 · answered by essentiallysolo 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The "hood" surrounding the head of the penis collects urine, bacteria and swear. An uncircumcised male must take precautions in keeping the "hood" clean. The "hood" needs to be pulled back for absolute cleaning. Many neglect this step in showering. Remember that body heat in that confined area is dark & gets pretty warm. Perfect conditions for bacterial growth. The "hood" is a beautiful asset to the uncircumcised male but, requires added responsibility.
2007-07-20 10:23:11 · answer #5 · answered by dburneson@sbcglobal.net 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
this isn't true.
if they were a condom and take care of themselves then they won't get an STD but just cause thier circucised doesn't mean they won't.
2007-07-20 10:15:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Being circumcised has nothing to do with STD's.
2007-07-20 10:16:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Simple is that,being circumcised,is nothing to do with std's.
2007-07-20 10:38:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I would like to know where you got this information, as it is not true.
2007-07-20 10:50:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not true.
Did you know that 86% of all statistics are made up on the spot???!!!
2007-07-20 10:40:06 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋