thatsub
Posts: 176
Joined: 5/3/2010 Status: offline
|
From the article that OP linked: quote:
The researchers determined that medical male circumcision prevalence increased from 15.6% to 49.4% among participants ages 15 to 49. Compared with uncircumcised men, circumcised men were younger, more educated, more likely to be unemployed, more likely to be of Sotho ethnicity, and more likely to know their HIV status. Looks like researches were comparing different types of people to begin with. The educated men with general HIV awareness were more likely to have lower HIV infection rates than the other group of men who happened to be non-circumcised. Researchers didn't correct results for other variables besides circumcision. Another point that the article makes: quote:
"This study shows that the rollout of male circumcision can have a [significant] short-term impact on the spread of HSV-2 among men," he said. Note the word "short-term". Looks like the circumcision worked like a sex ed class, but results didn't last.
_____________________________
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something. Plato Confucius say: To make a long story short, don't tell it.
|