RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV

RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Health and Safety

Message

mixielicous -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (1/31/2007 8:33:57 AM)
its just a common factor in my opinion.... the men who get circumcized, will come from a region where they arent daft enough to not wear a condom. duh.

justheather -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (1/31/2007 8:40:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mixielicous its just a common factor in my opinion.... the men who get circumcized, will come from a region where they arent daft enough to not wear a condom. duh. Are you aware that in most European countries, the majority of non-Jewish/non-Muslim men are not circumcised? Im pretty sure they still sell a good number of condoms there. And as an ICU nurse, I see more than my fair share of penises and there are probably a lot more uncut men in the US than people think. I agree with LeatherRose insofar as I am leaving it up to my offspring to decide. It's not my body, it's his. This works for me. Not knocking those who circumcise, but I do wonder why people go ahead with it without debate or research, never questioning the ritual procedure.

cynthiamarie -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 7:29:57 AM)
I've known a few men whose foreskins were a bit tight. During sex, the skin got little...um...like papercuts. Ouch. Some get surgery later in life to handle this problem. These little cuts probably raise up the probability of catching HIV on par or higher than with unprotected anal sex. If someone can't or won't wear condoms, I'm grateful that someone has the sense to encourage "mutilation" to lower some of the death toll. Many of us have had friends or family who have had HIV, so let's not throw that around like it's happening to faceless people. I'm the evil mommy who got it over with while her unmentionable was an infant. I had it done for religious reasons as well as for health and to avoid problems in the future. If my son has an issue with this, he will take it up with me later. Those of you with foreskins that wish to keep them and have no issues with it...peace. :) As per the references to school shots, in every area I've lived in they have been mandatory, not optional.

justheather -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 7:47:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cynthiamarie As per the references to school shots, in every area I've lived in they have been mandatory, not optional. They are mandatory with the exception that if a family presents a statement of belief that they do not subscribe to routine vaccination as a safe practice, their child can attend school without them. Edited to clarify: the objection is usually framed as a religious one.

enigmaslave -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 9:00:00 AM)
The mis-information continues.........................

enigmaslave -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 9:05:32 AM)
Folks....wash...wash alot. USE soap and water. Wash BEFORE and AFTER the washroom. (Why before...just think about it. You touch your dirty hands on that member of yours, and where will you stick that memeber, later with your S/O. ) Shower DAILY and befor and after sex Use protection.

somethndif -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 9:22:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LeatherRose In regards to the OP and Rule: You can always find reports to justify your position. In turn I could find reports on how NOT being circumcised is actually more healthy by not exposing the head of the penis to bacteria, yeast, etc., i.e. the hood provides protection. No, you can't always find reports to justify your position. you can't make this stuff up! If you think there is science showing that not being circumcised is healthier, find one and post a link here. Dan

BiCpl4BiSlaves -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 10:43:56 AM)
why are you trying to educate ignorants? why do you care so much if they don't get your message? you should let them do what they want, the world is over populated as it is.

Devilslilsister -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 10:44:34 AM)
i'm having a little boy and i dont know what to do. i dated a guy who wasnt cut and well it was quite nice and verra pretty! Erm... That being said....... i didnt cut off my daughters clit when she was born and i think its wrong to cut of a part of my sons penis. It DOES have alot of nerves....... but then all the problems i've heard about worry me. Plus, god knows what Master will say

SirStephan55 -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 11:27:12 AM)
I had it done as an adult for medical reasons - much more painful - something to keep in mind.

LeatherRose -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 4:43:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cynthiamarie I've known a few men whose foreskins were a bit tight. During sex, the skin got little...um...like papercuts. Ouch. Some get surgery later in life to handle this problem. These little cuts probably raise up the probability of catching HIV on par or higher than with unprotected anal sex. If someone can't or won't wear condoms, I'm grateful that someone has the sense to encourage "mutilation" to lower some of the death toll. Many of us have had friends or family who have had HIV, so let's not throw that around like it's happening to faceless people. I'm the evil mommy who got it over with while her unmentionable was an infant. I had it done for religious reasons as well as for health and to avoid problems in the future. If my son has an issue with this, he will take it up with me later. Those of you with foreskins that wish to keep them and have no issues with it...peace. :) As per the references to school shots, in every area I've lived in they have been mandatory, not optional. So what do you recommend as mutilation for women that can't or won't have their partner use a condomn? I mean fair is fair right? Shouldn't women take responsibility too? We too tear, we receive tiny tears in our vagina every time we have sex, so that would make us just as susceptible to disease, bacteria, infection, etc. As for religious reasons, it all depends on the religion. Most Christians spout circumcision as a religious mandate but don't actually know the truth. Circumcision is told to be done in the Old Testament, however, in the New Testament it is not. In fact, it is supposed to be part of the parcel of where Jesus died for us and we no longer have to shed blood or sacrifice blood for God. As for health issues, an uncut penis if kept clean like the body should be kept, is less likely to have problems than a cut one. The purpose of the foreskin and glans is to keep the head moist and not too dried out. They also can block out certain harmful invaders such as yeast. Btw, you're not evil for standing up for what you belive in.

LeatherRose -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 4:46:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: enigmaslave Folks....wash...wash alot. USE soap and water. Wash BEFORE and AFTER the washroom. (Why before...just think about it. You touch your dirty hands on that member of yours, and where will you stick that memeber, later with your S/O. ) Shower DAILY and befor and after sex Use protection. nodding Only thing I would add is don't just concentrate on your hands.

justheather -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 4:50:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirStephan55 I had it done as an adult for medical reasons - much more painful - something to keep in mind. Yes, Im certain it would hurt as an adult. Im not so certain it doesnt hurt just as much as an infant. Im sure having one's tonsils or appendix removed as a adult, for medical reasons, would be much more painful (or rather, the patient is actually able to identify the pain as being pain and complain about it, since they dont use anesthesia with RIC (unless you count Lidocaine) but then again infants can't reach the call button now can they...) but we aren't routinely removing those "useless" body parts at birth, are we? The American Pediatric Association's position on routine circumcision is that there is no apparent medical benefit to either being circumcised or not being circumcised that outweighs the other. With that in mind, I chose not to engage. I dont think people who do it are bad parents. I just dont think it is a necessary procedure.

LeatherRose -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 5:04:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justheather Are you aware that in most European countries, the majority of non-Jewish/non-Muslim men are not circumcised? Im pretty sure they still sell a good number of condoms there. And as an ICU nurse, I see more than my fair share of penises and there are probably a lot more uncut men in the US than people think. I agree with LeatherRose insofar as I am leaving it up to my offspring to decide. It's not my body, it's his. This works for me. Not knocking those who circumcise, but I do wonder why people go ahead with it without debate or research, never questioning the ritual procedure. Early Romans used sheep intestines as condoms. Speaking of sheep, Baa baa! People following rituals without knowing the why remind me of sheep. That and of course peer pressure. They did it to their offspring so we should too. Or worse yet, we don't want him to be teased for being different. Give me a break! I can think for myself thank you and fully expect my boys to be able to as well. It's ok to question the government, or religion. What's not ok is when asking questions to be told that it isn't ok or that you just don't do that because then you don't have faith. If we were made with a brain why not use it?!

LeatherRose -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 5:23:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: somethndif No, you can't always find reports to justify your position. you can't make this stuff up! If you think there is science showing that not being circumcised is healthier, find one and post a link here. Dan http://www.askdrsears.com/html/1/T012000.asp Gee, type in "to circumcise or not" in Google, and the first one to pop up. Lo and behold! The American Academy of Pediatrics. I think these people might know something of what they are talking about. And I still argue that you can always find something on the Internet to back up theories. It is full of reports for everything you can think of. And if you honestly think that people don't make things up and put it on the internet... I have two words for you: Urban Legends All I can say is I'm glad I'm not that gullible. (Yes I am sarcastic and a cynic)

KatyLied -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 6:30:30 PM)
quote: I see more than my fair share of penises Well you little braggart!

justheather -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 6:32:39 PM)
I get to put catheters in 'em too. Jealous?

KatyLied -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 6:35:48 PM)
Not after hearing that.

justheather -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/1/2007 6:38:24 PM)
Oh come on, it's fun! And you get a real sense of satisfaction when the job is completed! AND...if they resist, you can tie their arms down!

gregor2001us -> RE: Male circumcision reduces risk of HIV (2/2/2007 12:50:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justheather Oh come on, it's fun! And you get a real sense of satisfaction when the job is completed! AND...if they resist, you can tie their arms down! Now Heather, your getting me much too hot to be able to contribute to this thread. <Takes long slow breath to cool off> If you read the report and think about what it says, it does not advocate for widespread circumcision in the US as an effective way to prevent AIDS. circ’d men had a 1.6% chance of contracting aids, while the normal men had a 3.4% chance. Or if you were circ’d you had an incidence of 16 men out of a 1,000, while normal men had an incidence of 34 men out of 1,000. This doesn’t sound very compelling. Or use the number in a more familiar and less frightening context. Relate that 50% from the study to birth control, a similar situation in which you want to be very certain that you are safe. How many people will be satisfied if their birth control method only reduces the chance of pregnacny by 50%? Flip of a coin, in other words. On top of all this, in the details they point out that, in reality, the circ'd person still has to do all the other more effective things like condom use. So in effect, all they get for their circ is a 50 50 chance of being safe when they fail to do the other stuff reliably. How many partners or times do you want to have sex if you only have a "flip of a coin" expectation of being safe? Keep in mind that those promoting this have a single minded, fanatical focus. Their prime directive is to reduce the incidence of AIDS. Nothing else matters, becuase AIDS is ripping apart the society and they are fighting this. But even they do not advocate this "solution" for the US, only in Africa, where they are up against a wall. But even there, it may not be an effective strategy. Studies comparing African countries that have high incidences of circ vs low incidences have failed to see a benefit. Regards,

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125