15,635
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→USA: Add text.
|format=PDF
|quote=Some readers will be unaware that the AAP is not a dispassionate scientific research body , but rather a trade association for pediatricians. Those among its members and stakeholders who perform NTCs stand to profit from the procedure, to the collective annual tune of $1.25 billion according to one (albeit notimpartial) estimate. Given the yawning potential for a financial conflict of interest, then, there needs to be a very strong, independent medical case for circumcision; and the AAP had better be able to show that it is both the safest and most cost effective means of promoting infant health. Both of these propositions fail,however, as I will continue to show in what follows.
}}
* {{REFjournal
|last=Svoboda
|first=J. Steven
|author-link=J. Steven Svoboda
|last2=Van Howe
|first2=Robert S.
|author2-link=Robert S. Van Howe
|etal=no
|title=Out of step: fatal flaws in the latest AAP policy report on neonatal circumcision
|trans-title=
|language=Engiish
|journal=J Med Ethics
|location=
|date=2013
|volume=39
|issue=7
|pages=
|url=https://www.arclaw.org/wp-content/uploads/Svoboda-Van-Howe-Out-of-Step-Fatal-Flaws-in-AAP...-JME-2013.pdf
|archived=
|quote=
|pubmedID=
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=10.1136/medethics-2013-101346
|accessdate=2020-08-02
}}