quote:

the UN stance on female circumcision is unequivocal. Whenever it is mentioned, it is referred to as Female Genital Mutilation.

quote:

Dr Godfrey Kigozi, one of the researchers in the Ugandan study, has said, "When you say circumcision reduces acquisition ... it does not mean it eliminates HIV/AIDS. The essential message is that you cannot depend on circumcision to protect you. Therefore, don't circumcise solely for the purpose of reducing your risk.

quote:

Under the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, an infant has rights that include security of person, life, freedom and bodily integrity. Routine infant male circumcision is an unnecessary and irreversible procedure. Therefore, many consider it to be “unwarranted mutilating surgery”.

quote:

Kevin De Cock, MD, director of the World Health Organization's HIV/AIDS program, says that if the findings hold up, the global agency will issue guidelines backing the procedure for HIV prevention.
Male circumcision could avert as many as two million new infections over 10 years in sub-Saharan Africa alone, he says.
De Cock says his agency will await the results of two more large studies, expected to be completed next year in Kenya and Uganda, before making a move.

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

quote:

Kevin De Cock, MD, director of the World Health Organization's HIV/AIDS program, says that if the findings hold up, the global agency will issue guidelines backing the procedure for HIV prevention.
Male circumcision could avert as many as two million new infections over 10 years in sub-Saharan Africa alone, he says.
De Cock says his agency will await the results of two more large studies, expected to be completed next year in Kenya and Uganda, before making a move.

In other words, the WHO have not backed the study as it is NOT complete and it is NOT held up as yet.

It has also been studied that this is contry to female circumcision which is thought to increase the likelyhood of the HIV virus. 

Peace and Rapture

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

The article is around 8 months old and from a Canadian source on a medical web journal cited from direct statements of De Cock.

And I far as I was aware the studies are not as yet fully completed but are to be ceased.

No one has made an official statement about them as being completed, just ended - ie - not fulfilled to the expected term.  Whether this is due to a lack of funding, or that at the present time the sponsers have the results they 'need' who knows?  *call me the cynic*

 

Anyway - lets look at it from your point of view though, for discussions sake.

These studies are NOT intended for USA or european AIDS links.  This is documented for African countries.

If as a adult male you want to go for circumcision as an aid for AIDS - no pun intended - your free choice.

How fabulous for you.

Circumcising males against their knowledge or consent is a different matter altogether.  And using the excuse that we do non consensual injections etc to children all the time is such an empty argument.  This is bodily mutilation that is not a necessary procedure.  As an adult, you should be aware of all possible care to take to avoid STDs.  Sexual intercourse is only one way of coming into contact with the AIDS virus.  Mutilating a child based on studies done in africa sponsered by who know whom, just doesn't cut it with me.

 

 

This is getting tiresome. 

 

The Kenyan and Ugandan studies you are disparaging were conducted by The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).  The co-principal investigators of the Kenyan trial are Robert Bailey, Ph.D., M.P.H., of the University of Illinois at Chicago, and Stephen Moses, M.D., M.P.H., University of Manitoba, Canada. In addition to NIAID support, the Kenyan trial was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and included Kenyan researchers Jeckoniah Ndinya-Achola, M.B.Ch.B., and Kawango Agot, Ph.D., M.P.H. The Ugandan trial is led by Ronald Gray, M.B.B.S., M.Sc., of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland. Additional collaborators in the Ugandan trial were David Serwadda, M.Med., M.Sc., M.P.H., Nelson Sewankambo, M.B.Ch.B., M.Med.M.Sc., Stephen Watya, M.B.Ch.B., M.Med., and Godfrey Kigozi, M.B.Ch.B., M.P.H.

 

In the article I referenced -- and to which I provided the link -- in the post that started this thread, there is another link to this press release by the NIH which provides more information about the studies.  These were carefully done, scientific studies.  Here is the link to the NIH press release. 

 

 http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/newsreleases/2006/AMC12_06.htm

 

And here is a relevant quotation from the NIH press release:

 

“Many studies have suggested that male circumcision plays a role in protecting against HIV acquisition,” notes NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. “We now have confirmation—from large, carefully controlled, randomized clinical trials—showing definitively that medically performed circumcision can significantly lower the risk of adult males contracting HIV through heterosexual intercourse. While the initial benefit will be fewer HIV infections in men, ultimately adult male circumcision could lead to fewer infections in women in those areas of the world where HIV is spread primarily through heterosexual intercourse.”

 

"The findings from the African studies may have less impact on the epidemic in the United States for several reasons. In the United States, most men have been circumcised. Also, there is a lower prevalence of HIV. Moreover, most infections among men in the United States are in men who have sex with men, for whom the amount of benefit provided by circumcision is unknown. Nonetheless, the overall findings of the African studies are likely to be broadly relevant regardless of geographic location: a man at sexual risk who is uncircumcised is more likely than a man who is circumcised to become infected with HIV. Still, circumcision is only part of a broader HIV prevention strategy that includes limiting the number of sexual partners and using condoms during intercourse."

 

The point here is that your reliance upon a quote from Mr. de Cock that was 8 months old was grossly misleading.  It was made before the results of the Kenyan and Ugandan studies were known in December 2006.  Mr. de Cock -- like every other responsible person in the fight against HIV and AIDS -- now accepts the results of these studies.  And, as explained in the highlighted passage above, NIH believes that the results of these studies has application here in the U.S., as well as in Africa.

 

Dan

 

 

< Message edited by somethndif -- 4/2/2007 6:09:20 PM >

(in reply to darkinshadows)

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!

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

Not misleading - pointing out that the study was pulled before expected and therefore has not been fullfilled to course.  Even you mentioned that.  Question always is - why?

And I would still love to know who sponsered the study.

We can all see who conducted the studies - what affiliations do they belong to?

edit to ad - The majority of those you listed are american doctors and associations, btw - interesting?

Also, this is only a study on female to male infection which is a small percentage of case study.

 

And how about lifestyle of those taking part in the studies?

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

I don't read 'articles' - I read the actual report as I prefere my information first hand and if you if you bothered to read the study instead of rely on Reuters or other sensational news groups and sites for your info you may know what you were really talking about.

 

Your percentage is in error any way - as there were two studies - one in uganda and one in kenya - neither hit the 60% mark (I am on my Boys pc right now and the report isnt at hand, but I believe it was 43% and 57(ish) % for each study - when I return home, I will take a more detailed look for you if you wish)

 

The circumcised also had a third (approximently) less time of sexual activity than those who were unmutilated.  Plus the report actually recommends that the results are not helpful in a country such as the US - simply because the infection rate for the HIV Virus is a higher percentage within the gay and male to female infection, which this study was not based upon.

 

Anything else I can assist you with information wise?