Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Circumcision study flaws

8 bytes added, 00:08, 3 August 2020
Revise text.
}}</ref>
Foreskinned doctors tend to write papers hostile to circumcision, while [[circumcised doctors ]] tend to write papers in favor of circumcision.<ref name="hill2007" /> Consequently, the medical literature regarding male circumcision is highly polarized, argumentative, polarized, and [[Bias| biased]].
==Review of the circumcision literature==
|format=
|quote=As they saying goes, follow the money. Now you know why neither the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, or the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists haven’t condemned this unnecessary surgery, and why their physician members are quick to recommend the procedure to expectant parents.
}}</ref> Non-therapeutic circumcision of boys has become the proverbial ''Goose that That Lays Golden Eggs'',<ref>{{REFweb
|url=http://www.read.gov/aesop/091.html
|archived=
15,635
edits

Navigation menu