History of circumcision: Difference between revisions

  |location=New York

  |last=Kellogg

  |first=John Harvey

  |year=1888

  |last=Hutchinson

  |first=Jonathan

  |issue=9

  |pages=26,76-78

  |last=Campbell

  |first=M.F.

  |year=1970

  |title=Urology

  |edition=3

  |chapter=The Male Genital Tract and the Female Urethra

  |page=1836

[[Image:FGC.jpeg|right|thumb|From Historical American Female Circumcision medical papers]]

Doctors were eager to claim that they could prevent and cure many of these aliments, conditions and diseases because there were no treatments available then. Even though all of these claims have been throughly discredited, circumcision has remained a solution in search of a problem ever since. Many Americans are surprised to find out that female genital cutting ([[FGC]]) shares a strikingly similar history in the United States.  

  |volume=7

  |pages=31-33

[[FGC]] was even covered by Blue Cross Blue Shield until 1977. Nowadays, many forms of [[FGC]] are now considered forms of female genital mutilation ([[FGM]]), which are banned in all western countries.

=== 19th century ===

* 1845 [[Edward H. Dixon]] declares that circumcision '''prevents [[masturbation]]'''.<ref name="Dixon"/>

}}</ref>

* 1870 [[Lewis A. Sayre]] publishes a paper 'proving' that circumcision '''cures epilepsy'''.<ref>{{REFjournal

  |pages=255-274

}}</ref>

* 1879 [[H. H. Kane]] 'discovers' that circumcision '''cures nocturnal emissions and abdominal neuralgia'''.<ref>{{Kane1879}}</ref>

* 1886 [[William G. Eggleston]] declares that '''foreskin causes crossed eyes'''.<ref>{{Eggleston1886}}</ref>

* 1890 [[William D. Gentry]] declares that circumcision '''cures blindness, deafness and dumbness.'''<ref>{{REFjournal

}}</ref>

* 1894 [[H. L. Rosenberry]] publishes paper 'proving' that circumcision '''cures urinary and rectal incontinence'''.<ref>{{Rosenberry1894}}</ref>

}}</ref>

[[File:Single_mogen.jpg|right|thumb|The [[Gomco|Gomco]] and [[Mogen|Mogen]] clamps.]]

* 1935 [[R. W. Cockshut]] demands that all boys be circumcised in order to '''desensitize the penis and promote chastity'''.<ref name="Cockshut1935"/>

* 1951 [[Abraham Ravich]] invents claims that circumcision prevents '''cervical cancer in women'''.<ref>{{Ravich1951}}</ref>

* 1954 [[Ernest L. Wynder]] claims that male circumcision '''prevents cervical cancer in women.'''<ref>{{Wynder1954}}</ref>

  |title=USPTO patent number RE24,377

  |publisher=USPTO

}}</ref>

* 1966 Masters and Johnson erroneous claim that there is '''no difference in sensitivity between penises with and without [[foreskin]]'''.<br>(Note: Their work helps propagate the medical dogma that [[circumcision]] has no effect on sexuality go practically unquestioned for nearly the next four decades.)<ref>{{REFbook

  |year=1966

  |title=Human Sexual Response

  |location=Boston, MA

}}</ref>

* 1971 [[Abraham Ravich]] claims that circumcision prevents cancer of the bladder and the rectum.<ref>{{Ravich1971}}</ref>

  |last=Evanston

  |first=Ill

  |year=1971

  |title=Hospital Care of Newborn Infants

}}</ref>

  |last=Dagher

  |init=R

  |last=Spock

  |first=Benjamin

  |title=Baby and Child Care

  |pages=1946-1976

}}</ref>

  |last=Fink

  |first=Aaron J.

}}</ref>

* 1997 [[Edgar J. Schoen]] tries and fails once again to convince European countries to institute mass circumcision.<ref>{{REFjournal

}}</ref>

* 1998 [[Howard J. Stang]], inventor of an upright circumcision restraint fails to mention this conflict of interest in his article promoting infant circumcision.<ref>{{REFjournal

* 1999 The [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] Task Force on Circumcision, after reviewing 40 years worth of medical studies, concluded that the "potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision... are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision." This report is also the first time the AAP has acknowledged (after decades of doctors mindlessly repeating the belief that babies don't feel significant pain) that circumcision without anesthesia is traumatic and if circumcision is to be done, anesthesia should be used. Here are some highlights from the report:

::'''Role of Hygiene:''' "there is little evidence to affirm the association between circumcision status and optimum penile hygiene."

::'''Penile Cancer:''' "in a developed country such as the United States, penile cancer is a rare disease and the risk of penile cancer developing in an [[uncircumcised]] man, although increased compared with a circumcised man, is low."

::'''Urinary Tract Infections:''' "breastfeeding was shown to have a threefold protective effect on the incidence of UTI in a sample of [[uncircumcised]] infants. However, breastfeeding status has not been evaluated systematically in studies assessing UTI and circumcision status." meaning that the earlier UTIs studies results were confounded. Even if their numbers were accurate, in order to prevent one UTI during the first year of life by circumcising a baby boy, approximately 195 babies who will not get a UTI would need to be circumcised. Also infant girls commonly develop UTIs(in some studies at even higher rates than infant boys) and the standard treatment for them is antibiotics which works just as well for infant boys with UTIs. The AAP concludes this section noting that "the absolute risk of developing a UTI in an [[uncircumcised]] male infant is low (at most, ~1%)".

}}</ref>

  |last=Schoen

  |first=Edgar J.

}}</ref>

{{SEEALSO}}

* [[Abraham L. Wolbarst|Abraham Leo Wolbarst]]

* [[United Kingdom]]

{{LINKS}}

  |accessdate=2020-06-06

}}

* {{REFjournal

  |last=Dunsmuir  

  |author2-link=

  |etal=no

  |journal=BJU Int

  |date=1999-01-01

  |pages=1-12

  |url=http://www.cirp.org/library/history/dunsmuir1/?source=post_page--

  |pubmedID=1034940

  |pubmedCID=

  |last=Ephron

  |first=John M.

  |author-link=

  |year=2001

  |chapter=

  |pages=222-233

  |isbn=0-300-08377-7

  |quote=

  |first=Jonathan D.

  |author-link=

  |location=Chicago

  |format=PDF

  |format=

  |quote=

}}

[[Category:From Intactipedia]]

[[Category:From IntactWiki]]