15,642
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Intact is the new norm: Add text and citation.
}}</ref>
Preston (1970) considered the matter of infant [[circumcision]]. He examined and debunked claims that male circumcision could prevent cancer of the [[cervix ]] in women, cancer of the [[penis ]] and cancer of the prostate in men. Preston concluded:
<blockquote>Routine circumcision of the newborn is an unnecessary procedure. It provides questionable benefits and is associated with a small but definite incidence of complications and hazards. These risks are preventable if the operation is not performed unless truly medically indicated. Circumcision of the newborn is a procedure that should no longer be considered routine.<ref>{{REFjournal
Laumann et al. reported an incidence of newborn circumcision of 78 percent in 1971.
The [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] (AAP) is not an "academy" at all. It is a [[medical trade association ]] that protects and advances the business and financial interests of its pediatrician "fellows". Influenced by Preston's paper, the AAP published a manual on the hospital care of newborn infants in 1971. The manual included the statement:
<blockquote>
There are no valid medical indications for circumcision in the neonatal period.<ref>{{REFbook
It was at about this time that several small organizations that opposed non-therapeutic circumcision of boys started to appear. They were the first [[intactivists]], although that word had not yet been coined. One such organization was the Remain Intact Organization of Larchwood, Iowa, which was lead by Rev. [[George Zangger| Russell George Zangger]]. From the 1970s to the 1990s Zangger sent out cards with New Testament quotations that said the outward sign of circumcision is of no value. [[Jeffrey R. Wood]] formed [[INTACT Educational Foundation| INTACT]] (Infants Need to Avoid Circumcision [[Trauma]]), founded in 1976 as a local resource serving Western Massachusetts, and "Dedicated to Preserving Freedom of Choice." The organization gained recognition and had members across the nation.
Boczko & Freed (1979) collected cases of [[penile cancer]] in [[circucisedcircumcised]] men and by so doing, disproved the false belief propagated since 1932 by [[Abraham L. Wolbarst]] that circumcision was protective against penile cancer.<ref name="boczko1979">{{REFjournal
|last=Boczo
|first=Stanley
Peter Moore (2015) reported that the incidence of circumcision was 55 percent.<ref name="moore2015"/>
Jacobsen et al. (2021) used data from 2003 through 2016 from the Kid's Inpatient Database of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to compare [[intact]] with [[circumcised]] boys in the first 28 days of life. The authors reported a gradual declining trend in the incidence of neonatal non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] throughout the study period. The overall incidence of circumcision decreased from 57.4 percent in 2003 to 52.1 percent in 2016 over the 13 year study period or 5.3 percentage points for an average decrease of 0.4 percentage point per year. The author authors noted "neonatal circumcision rates decreased significantly over time."<ref name="jacobson2021" />
There was significant variation in the incidence of circumcision by region with the Midwest reporting an incidence of 75 percent (three out of four) for the period, while boys in the West were most likely to preserve their [[foreskin]] as the West reported an incidence of only 25.9 percent or about 1 boy in 4 being [[circumcised]].<ref name="jacobson2021" />
=== Intact is the new norm ===
[[Intact America]] argues that public opinion regarding non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] of children is approaching or at a "tipping point" at which [[intact]] genitals would be preferred over the [[circumcised]] variety.<ref>{{REFweb
|url=https://intactamerica.org/public-opinion-on-circumcision/
|title=Public Opinion on Circumcision: Can Intactivists Hit A Tipping Point?
|last=Anonymous
|first=
|init=
|publisher=Intact America
|date=2024-03-23
|accessdate=2024-04-09
}}</ref>
The percentage of American boys being [[circumcised]] has been slowly declining for a long time, while the number of boys with [[intact]] [[foreskin]] has correspondingly increased.<ref name="jacobson2021" /> The percentage of [[intact]] newborn boys now exceeds the percentage of [[circumcised]] newborn boys.