Changes

'''Posthectomy''' is the more accurate medical term that more accurately reflects the injury and loss Circumcision of functional body tissue, but boys in the Biblical [[euphemismUnited States]], ''circumcision'', is more commonly used.With reference to involuntary, non-therapeutic circumcision of children, [[Child Genital Cutting (CGC)]] is a newer term that hit its high point in 1965 and has been introduced to avoid issues associated with more traditional termsslowly declining in popularity ever since. Bollinger (2023) identifed CGC as an Less than 1/2 of the newborn boys in the United States were [[Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs)| adverse childhood experiencecircumcised]]in 2022.<ref name="bollinger2023">{{REFjournal |last=Bollinger |init=D |author-link=Dan Bollinger |last2= |init2= |author2-link= |url=https://kindredmedia.org/2023/02/adverse-childhood-experiences-dysfunctional-households-and-circumcision/ |title=Adverse Childhood Experiences, Dysfunctional Households, And CircumcisionYang et al. |journal=Kindred |date=2023-02-28 |volume= |issue= |pages= |accessdate=2023-03-01}}</ref> Tye & Sardi (20222025) concluded that parents must consider "psychological or psychosocial effects reported the rate of decline in the incidence of infant circumcision,"in their study period was 5/10s of one percent per year.<ref name="tye2022yang2025"> {{REFjournal |last=TyeYang

|init=MCP

|last2=SardiZhu

|init2=LMX |author2-link=Lauren Sardi |last3=Patel |first3= |init3=EU |author3-link= |last4=Quin |first4= |init4=PC |author4-link= |last5=Grabowski |first5= |init5=MK |author5-link= |last6=Tobian |first6= |init6=AAR |author6-link=Aaron Tobian

|title=Psychological, psychosocial, and psychosexual aspects of penile circumcisionTrends in Circumcision Among Newborn Males in the US

|journal=Int J Impot ResJAMA Pediatrics |location= |date=20232025-10-0502 |season= |volume=35 |issue=3 |article=e252464 |page= |pages=242-8 |url=https://www.galdefjamanetwork.org/wp-contentcom/uploadsjournals/2023jamapediatrics/09fullarticle/Tye-Sardi-Psycho-Aspects-of-Penile-Circumcision-IJIR-2022.pdf2838312

|pubmedID=3534730240952753 |pubmedCID=12439174 |DOI=10.10381001/s41443-022-00553-9 |format=PDFjamapediatrics.2025.2464 |accessdate=20242025-1209-1817}}</ref>That declining trend is expected to have continued.

Deacon & Muir (2022) have reviewed '''Posthectomy''' is the evidence and concluded that "there is no more accurate medical justification for performing a circumcision prior to an age term that he can assess more accurately reflects the known risks injury and potential benefitsloss of functional body tissue, and choose but the Biblical [[euphemism]], ''circumcision'', is more commonly used.With reference to involuntary, non-therapeutic circumcision of children, [[Child Genital Cutting (CGC)]] is a newer term that has been introduced to give or withhold avoid issues associated with more traditional terms. Bollinger (2023) identifed CGC as an [[informed consentAdverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs)| adverse childhood experience]] himself."<ref name="deacon2022bollinger2023">{{REFjournal |last=Deacon |first=MatthewBollinger |init=MD |author-link=Dan Bollinger |last2=Muir |first2=Gordon |init2=G

|etalurl=nohttps://kindredmedia.org/2023/02/adverse-childhood-experiences-dysfunctional-households-and-circumcision/ |title=What is the medical evidence on non-therapeutic child circumcision?Adverse Childhood Experiences, Dysfunctional Households, And Circumcision. |journal= Int J Impot ResKindred |date=20222023-0102-0828 |urlvolume=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41443-021-00502-y |pubmedIDissue=34997197 |DOIpages=10.1038/s41443-021-00502-y |accessdate=20222023-03-01-30

Fendereski et al. Tye & Sardi (20242022) reported a massive study using data from a private insurance company database concluded that found that [[circumcised]] boys have three times as many penile issues as compared with [[intact]] boys through age 5. This study matched 852parents must consider "psychological or psychosocial effects of circumcision,051 [[circumcised]] boys with 852,051 [[intact]] boys who served as controls."<ref name=fendereski2024"tye2022">{{REFjournal |last=FendereskiTye

|init=KMC

|last2=HornsSardi

|init2=JJLM |author2-link= |last3=Driggs |first3= |init3=N |author3-link= |last4=Lau |first4= |init4=G |author4-link= |last5=Shaeffer |first5= |init5=AJ |author5-link=Lauren Sardi |etal=no |title=Comparing Penile Problems in Circumcised vs. Uncircumcised Boys: Insights From a Large Commercial Claims Database With a Focus on Provider Type Performing Circumcision Psychological, psychosocial, and psychosexual aspects of penile circumcision

|journal=Int J Pediatr SurgImpot Res |date=20242023-1105 |volume=5935 |issue=113 |articlepages=161614242-8 |url=https://www.sciencedirectgaldef.comorg/sciencewp-content/articleuploads/abs2023/pii09/S002234682400407XTye-Sardi-Psycho-Aspects-of-Penile-Circumcision-IJIR-2022.pdf

|pubmedID=3908496035347302 |pubmedCID=11486584 |DOI=10.10161038/j.jpedsurg.2024.06.s41443-022 |accessdate=2025-0100553-03}}</ref> These findings are not surprising since the human [[foreskin]] provides both [[Immunological and protective function of the foreskin| protective and immunological functions]] against both physical [[trauma]] and [[infection]]. Obviously, [[circumcised]] boys lack these protections. [[Dan Bollinger]] (2025) enumerated the many harms and injuries caused by medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic [[circumcision of the newborn]], its inherent violation of [[human rights]] and its degradation of health and well-being.<ref name="bollinger2025-08-27">{{REFdocument |title=Policy Paper: Newborn Circumcision as a Negative Wellness Factor |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394517060_Policy_Paper_Newborn_Circumcision_as_a_Negative_Wellness_Factor |contribution= |last=Bollinger |first=Dan |publisher=Research Gate9

|date=2025-08 |accessdate=20252024-0812-2918

Deacon & Muir (2022) have reviewed the evidence and concluded that "there is no medical justification for performing a circumcision prior to an age that he can assess the known risks and potential benefits, and choose to give or withhold [[informed consent]] himself."<ref name="deacon2022">{{REFjournal |last=Condemnation of child circumcisionDeacon |first=Matthew |init=M[[Alfonso Cepeda |author-Emilianilink= |last2=Muir |first2=Gordon | Cepedainit2=G |author2-Emiliani]] et al. {2025) stated:link=<blockquote> |etal=noOur results reinforce |title=What is the relevance of [medical evidence on non-therapeutic child circumcision? |journal= Int J Impot Res |date=2022-01-08 |url=https://www.cirpnature.orgcom/libraryarticles/anatomy/colds41443-021-00502-taylor/ Cold and Taylor’s 11 1999 conclusions] (p. 42), which now seem more pertinent than ever: “The prepucey |pubmedID=34997197is a specialized, specific erogenous tissue in both males and females |DOI=10.1038/s41443-021-00502-y Therefore, surgical excision should be restricted to lesions that are |accessdate=2022-01-30unresponsive to medical therapy. . . Preputial plasty should be considered in place of circumcision whenever possible, so as to preserve}}</ref>the corpuscular sensory receptors, dartos muscle, penile mucosa andcomplete function of the penisFendereski et al. . . Although (2024) reported a Fourcroy grade 1 femalecircumcision would excise less tissue than in massive study using data from a male, this comparison cannot be used to justify female circumcision. Excision of normal,erogenous genital tissue from healthy male or female children cannotbe condoned, private insurance company database that found that [[circumcised]] boys have three times as many penile issues as the histology confirms that the external genitalia arespecialized sensory tissues. . compared with [[intact]] boys through age 5. Removal of normal genital anatomy inchildren and infants should be deferred until the individual can make aninformed decision. If external genital tissue must be excised to combata disease process that threatens the child’s healthThis study matched 852, and is unresponsiveto medical therapy051 [[circumcised]] boys with 852, then the amount of tissue should be limited so 051 [[intact]] boys who served as topreserve the anatomy and function of the external genitaliacontrols.”<ref name="cepeda2025fendereski2024">{{REFjournal |last=Cepeda-Emiliani Fendereski

|init=AK |author-link=Alfonso Cepeda-Emiliani |last2=Otero-Alén Horns

|init2=MJJ

|last3=Suárez-QuintanillaDriggs

|init3=JN

|last4=Gándara-Cortés Lau

|init4=MG

|last5=García-Caballero Shaeffer

|init5=TAJ

|title=The sensory penisComparing Penile Problems in Circumcised vs. Uncircumcised Boys: A comprehensive immunohistological and ontogenetic exploration of human penile innervationInsights From a Large Commercial Claims Database With a Focus on Provider Type Performing Circumcision

|language= |journal=AndrologyJ Pediatr Surg |date=20252024-09-1911 |volume=59 |issue=11 |article= |pages=1-41161614 |url=https://onlinelibrarywww.wileysciencedirect.com/doiscience/epdfarticle/10.1111abs/pii/andr.70118S002234682400407X

|pubmedID=4097080639084960 |pubmedCID=11486584 |DOI=10.11111016/andrj.70118jpedsurg.2024.06.022 |accessdate=2025-1001-03}}</ref> These findings are not surprising since the human [[foreskin]] provides both [[Immunological and protective function of the foreskin| protective and immunological functions]] against both physical [[trauma]] and [[infection]]. Obviously, [[circumcised]] boys lack these protections. [[Dan Bollinger]] (2025) enumerated the many harms and injuries caused by medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic [[circumcision of the newborn]], its inherent violation of [[human rights]] and its degradation of health and well-being.<ref name="bollinger2025-08-27">{{REFdocument |title=Policy Paper: Newborn Circumcision as a Negative Wellness Factor |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394517060_Policy_Paper_Newborn_Circumcision_as_a_Negative_Wellness_Factor |contribution= |last=Bollinger |first=Dan |publisher=Research Gate |format=PDF |date=2025-08 |accessdate=2025-08-0129

==HistoryCondemnation of child circumcision==Circumcision was popularized in English[[Alfonso Cepeda-speaking nations in the nineteenth century. The practice of nonEmiliani| Cepeda-therapeutic circumcision of boys now has greatly declined in [[Australia]], [[Canada]], [[New Zealand]] and the [[United KingdomEmiliani]]et al. It has been gradually declining since 1980 in {2025) stated:<blockquote>Our results reinforce the [[United States]]. It has ''never'' been a popular practice in other western nations. Circumcision relevance of boys is not done in the Russian Federation, Latin America, or [[China]]https://www. In [[India]] only the minority Muslim population does circumcision of childrencirp. In Europe it is only done for religious reasons by Muslims org/library/anatomy/cold-taylor/ Cold and JewsTaylor’s 11 1999 conclusions] (p.42), which now seem more pertinent than ever: “The prepuce Circumcision is classified as a form of [[genital mutilation]]specialized, specific erogenous tissue in both males and females.<!--Therefore, surgical excision should be restricted to lesions that are== Rationale == Reasons for performing unresponsive to medical therapy. . . Preputial plasty should be considered in place of circumcision range widely by culturewhenever possible, religionso as to preservethe corpuscular sensory receptors, locationdartos muscle, penile mucosa and age.-->   ===Cultural=== Many cultures perform circumcision as a rite complete function of passage into manhoodthe penis. . This is common in the Middle East and amongst some indigenous African and Southeast Asian peoples.Although a Fourcroy grade 1 female The [[United States]] and [[Israel]] are the only industrialized countries circumcision would excise less tissue than in the world to have a high incidence of non-therapeutic infant male , this comparison cannot be used to justify female circumcision. The vast majority Excision of infant circumcisions performed in normal,erogenous genital tissue from healthy male or female children cannotbe condoned, as the histology confirms that the [[United States]] external genitalia are for non-religious, non-medical reasonsspecialized sensory tissues. . . See [[History Removal of circumcision]]normal genital anatomy inchildren and infants should be deferred until the individual can make aninformed decision.If external genital tissue must be excised to combata disease process that threatens the child’s health, and is unresponsive=== No to medical indication ===therapy, then the amount of tissue should be limited so as toThere are no [[medical indication| medical indications]] for [[circumcision preserve the anatomy and function of the newborn]]external genitalia.”<ref name="aap1971cepeda2025">{{REFbookREFjournal |last=American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Fetus and NewbornCepeda-Emiliani

|init=A |yearauthor-link=1971Alfonso Cepeda-Emiliani |titlelast2=Standards and Recommendation for Hospital Care of Newborn infantsOtero-Alén |urlfirst2=https://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aap/#a1971 |scopeinit2=M |locationauthor2-link=Evanston |publisherlast3=American Academy of PediatricsSuárez-Quintanilla |ISBNfirst3= |accessdateinit3=2025J |author3-03link= |last4=Gándara-13Cortés }}</ref> The [[circumcision industry]] promotes [[circumcision of the newborn]] to the public because of the [[financial incentive]] to the doctor and to the maternity hospital. |first4= |init4=MThe form of circumcision adopted by the medical community essentially was equivalent to the Jewish form with ''[[periah]]'', so it inflicts the maximum injury and physical [[trauma]]. |author4-link= |last5=García-Caballero In a few cases with older patients, circumcision is legitimately indicated; a patient may be suffering recurring [[infection]], and other methods of treatment have failed. In other cases, a patient may be suffering from a severe case of [[phimosis]]. Overall, the actual medical necessity for circumcision is extremely rare since many conditions respond to conservative treatment. All circumcisions injure the patient by amputating the [[foreskin]] its with many protective, immunological, sensory, and sexual [[Foreskin#Physiological_functions| functions]]. first5= |init5=T |author5-link=# '''Deformed or malformed foreskin'''. A foreskin so deformed or malformed that it does not function properly may be excised by circumcision. |last6=García-Caballero |first6=# '''Traumatically injured foreskin'''. A foreskin so traumatically damaged that it cannot be surgically repaired is a valid medical reason for circumcision. |init6=R |author6-link=# '''Diseased foreskin.''' A foreskin that is diseased may be a valid indication for circumcision. Some diseases that qualify are malignancy, lichen sclerosis, [[Balanitis#Diabetic_males | yeast infection in men with diabetes]], and recurrent [[balanoposthitis]].last7=García-Caballero |first7=In such cases, the benefit of removing the problem foreskin may exceed the maleficial harms of tissue and function destruction. |init7=L ====Arguments of prophylaxia=== |author7-link=Though the practice of ritual circumcision of males, both consenting and non-consenting, has existed for millenia, the search for "potential medical benefits" began relatively recently. {''Potential'' means to exist in possibility, but not in actuality, so a "''potential'' benefit" is not a genuine proven benefit.) The discussion of circumcision in the Ninth Edition of the ''Encyclopǽdia Britannica'' (1876) made |etal=no mention of any prophylactic, medical, or therapeutic value or function.<ref>{{REFweb |urltitle=httpsThe sensory penis://www.cirp.org/library/history/encyclopaediabritannica1876/A comprehensive immunohistological and ontogenetic exploration of human penile innervation |trans-title=Circumcision |lastjournal=CheyneAndrology |firstdate=T. K.2025-09-19 |author-linkvolume= |publisherissue=Encyclopǽdia Brittanica |websitearticle=Circumcision Reference Library |datepages=18761-41 |accessdateurl=2019-11-https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/andr.70118 |formatarchived=

Initially, circumcision ==History==Circumcision was adopted popularized in English-speaking nations in the 19th nineteenth century as a way to stop . The practice of non-therapeutic circumcision of boys and men from masturbatingnow has greatly declined in [[Australia]], [[Canada]], when [[masturbationNew Zealand]] was claimed to be and the cause for many diseases[[United Kingdom]]. As It has been gradually declining since 1980 in the myth that circumcision prevented masturbation became debunked, advocates [[United States]]. It has ''never'' been a popular practice in other western nations. Circumcision of circumcision began boys is not done in the great search to find Russian Federation, Latin America, or [[China]]. In [[India]] only the "medical benefits" minority Muslim population does circumcision of circumcisionchildren. In Europe it is only done for religious reasons by Muslims and Jews.

Male and female circumcision involves the removal and disruption of normal anatomical structures that are primary areas of sexual sensation.<ref name="taylor1996"/> In the past, some advocates Circumcision is classified as a form of mass circumcision have considered the [[prepucegenital mutilation]] to be a "mistake of nature,".<!--{{Cold and Wiswell (1995)}} | [[Template:Cold and Wiswell (1995)|see more]]--> but this notion has no validity because the prepuce is ubiquitous in primates and because it provides functional advantages.<ref name="cold-mcgrath1995">{{REFbook |last=Cold |first=Christopher |init=C |last2=McGrath |first2Rationale =Kenneth |init2=K |author2-link=Ken McGrath |year=1999 |title=Male and female Reasons for performing circumcision: medicalrange widely by culture, religion, legallocation, and ethical considerations in pediatric practice |url=https://wwwage.cirp.org/library/anatomy/cold-mcgrath/ |work= |editor= |edition= |volume= |chapter=Anatomy and histology of the penile and clitoral prepuce in primates |pages= |location=New York |publisher= |isbn=0306461315 |quote= |accessdate=2019-10-12 |note=}}</ref>

All claims that  ===Cultural=== Many cultures perform circumcision prevents future disease are falseas a rite of passage into manhood. This is common in the Middle East and amongst some indigenous African and Southeast Asian peoples.<ref>{{REFweb |url=https://wwwThe [[United States]] and [[Israel]] are the only industrialized countries in the world to have a high incidence of non-therapeutic infant male circumcision.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/The vast majority of infant circumcisions performed in the [[United States]] are fornon-professionals/allegedreligious, non-medical-benefits/conclusions-and-references/reasons. See [[History of circumcision]]. === No medical indication === There are no [[medical indication|titlemedical indications]] for [[circumcision of the newborn]].<ref name=Conclusions"aap1971">{{REFbook |last=AnonymousAmerican Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Fetus and Newborn

|year=1971 |title=Standards and Recommendation for Hospital Care of Newborn infants |url=https://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aap/#a1971 |scope= |location=Evanston |publisher=Doctors Opposing CircumcisionAmerican Academy of Pediatrics |dateISBN=2016 |accessdate=20232025-1003-2213 }}</ref> They are made The [[circumcision industry]] promotes [[circumcision of the newborn]] to enable a physician the public because of the [[financial incentive]] to perform circumcision the doctor and collect a feeto the maternity hospital.<!--===Search for prophylactic reasons===

The practice form of finding prophylactic reasons for infant circumcision started in Germany in adopted by the nineteenth century, when non-Jewish Germans criticized medical community essentially was equivalent to the Jewish practice of infant circumcision as being barbaricform with ''[[periah]]'', Jewish doctors sprang to so it inflicts the defense of the religious practice by claiming health benefitsmaximum injury and physical [[trauma]].<ref name="ephron2001">{{REFbook |last=EphronIn a few cases |first=John M. |init=JM |author-link= |year=2001 |title=Medicine with older patients, circumcision is legitimately indicated; a patient may be suffering recurring [[infection]], and the German Jews |url=https://wwwother methods of treatment have failed.cirpIn other cases, a patient may be suffering from a severe case of [[phimosis]].org/library/history/ephron1/ |work= |editor= |edition= |volume= |chapter=6 |pages=222-33 |location=New Haven |publisher={{UNI|Yale University|Yale}} Press |isbn=0-300-08377-7 |quote= |accessdate=2019-11-20 |note=}}</ref> And so started Overall, the long tradition of Jewish doctors inventing reasons actual medical necessity for circumcision (is extremely rare since many conditions respond to conservative treatment. All circumcisions injure the patient by amputating the [[foreskin]] its with many protective, immunological, sensory, and deceving gentile doctors)sexual [[Foreskin#Physiological_functions| functions]].

Following the discovery of bacteria as a cause of many diseases – such as tuberculosis – the search began for other illnesses # '''Deformed or malformed foreskin'''. A foreskin so deformed or malformed that could it does not function properly may be prevented excised by circumcision.

In 1870 the prominent Dr# '''Traumatically injured foreskin'''. [[Lewis Albert Sayre|Lewis A. Sayre]] of NYC’s famed Bellevue Hospital<ref>https://nypost.com/2016/12/03/bellevues-doctors-invented-the-procedures-you-take-foreskin so traumatically damaged that it cannot be surgically repaired is a valid medical reason for-granted/</ref> claimed to cure a boy’s paralyzed legs with circumcision. Sayre's wild advocacy of circumcision exemplified how some [https://intaction.org/circumcision-facts-and-myths/ circumcision facts and myths] originated. He also claimed to cure epilepsy, mental disorders, hip-joint pain, & hernias with circumcision. “Genital irritations” & masturbation were deemed to be the cause of these issues. Sayre was later elected as the President of the American Medical Association. <ref>American Medical Association. Transactions of the American Medical Association. 1870;21:205–11</ref>

In the 1920s it was penile cancer# '''Diseased foreskin.''' A foreskin that is diseased may be a valid indication for circumcision. Some diseases that qualify are malignancy, lichen sclerosis, [[Balanitis#Diabetic_males| yeast infection in men with diabetes]], and recurrent [[Abraham L. Wolbarstbalanoposthitis]] . In such cases, the benefit of removing the problem foreskin may exceed the maleficial harms of tissue and function destruction. ====Arguments of prophylaxia====Though the practice of ritual circumcision of males, both consenting and non-consenting, has existed for millenia, the search for "potential medical benefits" began relatively recently. {''Potential'' means to exist in possibility, but not in actuality, so a "''potential'' benefit" is not a genuine proven benefit.) The discussion of circumcision in the Ninth Edition of the ''Encyclopǽdia Britannica'' (19261876) claims that circumcision can prevent penile cancermade no mention of any prophylactic, medical, or therapeutic value or function.<ref name="wolbarst1926">{{REFjournalREFweb |url=https://www.cirp.org/library/history/encyclopaediabritannica1876/ |lasttitle=WolbarstCircumcision |firstlast=Abraham L.Cheyne |initfirst=ALT. K. |author-link=Abraham L. Wolbarst |titlepublisher=Is circumcision a prophylactic against penis cancer?Encyclopǽdia Brittanica |journalwebsite=CancerCircumcision Reference Library |date=Jul 19261876 |volumeaccessdate=32019-11-10 |issueformat=4 |pagesquote=301-10

In Initially, circumcision was adopted in the 1940s19th century as a way to stop boys and men from masturbating, prostate and tongue cancer as well as STDs. when [[Eugene H. Handmasturbation]] (1949) falsely explains was claimed to be the cause for many diseases. As the myth that circumcision somehow protects against venereal diseases and tongue cancer.<ref name=prevented masturbation became debunked, advocates of circumcision began the great search to find the "hand1949medical benefits">{{REFjournal |last=Hand |first=Eugene H. |init=EH |author-link=Eugene H. Hand |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18135844/ |title=Circumcision and venereal disease |journal=Archives of Dermatology and Syphilology |date=1949-09 |volume=60 |issue=3 |pages341-6 |pubmedID=18135844 |DOI=10.1001/archderm.1949circumcision.01530030037004 |accessdate=2021-10-08}}</ref>

In Male and female circumcision involves the 1950s it was cervical cancer. [[Abraham Ravich]] (1951) invents the myth removal and disruption of normal anatomical structures that circumcision reduces the risk are primary areas of women getting cervical cancersexual sensation.<ref name="ravich1951taylor1996">{{Ravich1951}}</ref> In the late 1960s it was neuroses. past, some advocates of mass circumcision have considered the [[Morris Fishbeinprepuce]] (1969) calls for circumcision to prevent nervousness and, be a "mistake of coursenature, [[masturbation]]."<ref>!--{{Fishbein1969}}</ref> In the 1970s bladder- Cold and rectal cancer. [[Abraham Ravich]] Wiswell (19711995) claims that circumcision would prevent bladder cancer and rectal cancer.<ref>{{Ravich1971}}</ref> In the 1980s, UTIs. | [[Thomas E. Template:Cold and Wiswell(1995)|see more]] (1985) claims that circumcision, using a methodologically flawed report, reduces --> but this notion has no validity because the risk of urinary tract infectionsprepuce is ubiquitous in primates and because it provides functional advantages.<ref name="wiswell1985cold-mcgrath1995">{{REFjournal REFbook |last=WiswellCold |first=Thomas E.Christopher |init=TEC |last2=McGrath |first2=Kenneth |init2=K |authorauthor2-link=Thomas E. WiswellKen McGrath |year=1999 |title=Male and female circumcision: medical, legal, and ethical considerations in pediatric practice |url=https://pediatricswww.aappublicationscirp.org/contentlibrary/75anatomy/5cold-mcgrath/901 |titlework= |editor= |edition= |volume= |chapter=Decreased incidence Anatomy and histology of urinary tract infections the penile and clitoral prepuce in circumcised male infantsprimates |journalpages=Pediatrics |datelocation=May 1985New York |volumepublisher=75 |issueisbn=50306461315 |pagesquote=901-3

[[Aaron J. Fink]] (1986), with no evidence whatsoever, All claims that circumcision protects against [[AIDS]] followedprevents future disease are false.<ref name="fink1986">{{REFjournalREFweb |lasturl=Fink |first=Aaron Jhttps://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision. |init=AJ |authororg/for-professionals/alleged-medical-benefits/conclusions-and-link=Aaron J. Finkreferences/ |title=A possible explanation for heterosexual male infection with AIDSConclusions |journallast=New England Journal of MedicineAnonymous |datefirst=1986-10-30 |volumeinit=31 |issuepublisher=18Doctors Opposing Circumcision |page=1167 |url=https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198610303151818 |DOIdate=10.1056/NEJM1986103031518182016 |accessdate=20192023-1110-2022}}</ref>They are made to enable a physician to perform circumcision and collect a fee.<!--===Search for prophylactic reasons===

Retrospectively, The practice of finding prophylactic reasons for infant circumcision was always advertised as a cure for whatever disease was started in Germany in the public spotlight at nineteenth century, when non-Jewish Germans criticized the time. [[Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.O.C.)]] (2016) state:<blockquote>These claims date originally from before the advent Jewish practice of evidence-based medicineinfant circumcision as being barbaric, when Jewish doctors relied on sprang to the opinions defense of other clinicians to inform their the religious practice, rather than on scientifically collected evidenceby claiming health benefits.<ref name="doc2016ephron2001">{{REFwebREFbook |last=Ephron |first=John M. |init=JM |author-link= |year=2001 |title=Medicine and the German Jews |url=https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcisioncirp.org/for-professionalslibrary/history/ephron1/alleged-medical |work= |editor= |edition= |volume= |chapter=6 |pages=222-benefits/33 |titlelocation=Alleged Medical BenefitsNew Haven |publisher=[[Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.O.C.)]]{{UNI|Yale University|Yale}} Press |websiteisbn=0-300-08377-7 |datequote=2016-05

|format= |quotenote=}}</ref></blockquote>And so started the long tradition of Jewish doctors inventing reasons for circumcision (and deceving gentile doctors).

The sheer mass Following the discovery of bacteria as a cause of studies and publications that were released during those almost 180 years on this topic are many diseases – such as tuberculosis – the reason that even arguments search began for other illnesses that have been disproved multiple times, especially regarding infant and child could be prevented by circumcision, tenaciously persist up until today.

An everIn 1870 the prominent Dr. [[Lewis Albert Sayre|Lewis A. Sayre]] of NYC’s famed Bellevue Hospital<ref>https://nypost.com/2016/12/03/bellevues-doctors-invented-recurring element the-procedures-you-take-for-granted/</ref> claimed to cure a boy’s paralyzed legs with circumcision. Sayre's wild advocacy of circumcision exemplified how some [https://intaction.org/circumcision-facts-and-myths/ circumcision facts and myths] originated. He also claimed to cure epilepsy, mental disorders, hip-joint pain, & hernias with circumcision. “Genital irritations” & masturbation were deemed to be the cause of these issues. Sayre was later elected as the President of initiation rites found in many different cultures is the fixation upon American Medical Association. <ref>American Medical Association. Transactions of the genitaliaAmerican Medical Association.1870;21:205–11</ref>

It reflects the fascination that emerges from the ability to create new life. In most cultures, fertility is seen as the most precious good, and the body parts involved frequently find themselves in the focus of ritual acts1920s it was penile cancer. In many parts of the world, those rites take place when the boy reaches [[puberty]], and are meant to symbolize his transition from boy to manAbraham L. The removal of the male [[foreskinWolbarst]] is just one of many phenomena (1926) claims that developed in this contextcircumcision can prevent penile cancer. They range from the removal of the frenulum in boys and men through partial or complete removal of the [[foreskin]] up to radical operations<ref name="wolbarst1926">{{REFjournal |last=Wolbarst |first=Abraham L. Australian [[Aborigines]], as mentioned above, have their [[foreskin]]s removed |init=AL |author-link=Abraham L. It is also usual that, Wolbarst |title=Is circumcision a few weeks later, young men have their [[prophylactic against penis]]es sliced open in a [[subincision]], resulting in a partly or completely divided [[urethra]].cancer? |journal=Cancer |date=Jul 1926 |volume=3 |issue=4Another known, particularly massive, intervention is the stripping of the entire [[skin]] off the [[penis]]. In Indonesia, boys have metal or bamboo balls inserted into their [[penis]] shaft or [[Glans penis |glans]] at the beginning of [[puberty]], which form little "humps".pages=301-10}}</ref>

For many cultures it is also common to perform similar rituals on girls. This can range from relatively small interventions such as piercing or cutting In the clitoral hood1940s, to its complete removal prostate and up to radical removal of clitoral hood, tongue cancer as well as STDs. [[clitorisEugene H. Hand]], inner (1949) falsely explains that circumcision somehow protects against venereal diseases and tongue cancer.<ref name="hand1949">{{REFjournal |last=Hand |first=Eugene H. |init=EH |author-link=Eugene H. Hand |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18135844/ |title=Circumcision and venereal disease |journal=Archives of Dermatology and outer labia followed by sewing up the vaginaSyphilology |date=1949-09 |volume=60 |issue=3 |pages341-6 |pubmedID=18135844 |DOI=10.1001/archderm.1949.01530030037004 |accessdate=2021-10-08}}</ref>

''The following text is taken from In the 1950s it was cervical cancer. [[CircumpendiumAbraham Ravich]](1951) invents the myth that circumcision reduces the risk of women getting cervical cancer.''--<ref name="ravich1951">{{Ravich1951}}</ref>

Some people claim that circumcision has prophylactic benefitsIn the 1970s bladder- and rectal cancer. Especially in the [[USAAbraham Ravich]] those arguments have persisted for more then a 100 years, with ever changing diseases (1971) claims that circumcision is said to protect against. At first, these were diseases where [[masturbation]] was believed to be the cause. After bacteria and viruses had been discovered, arguments changed, would prevent bladder cancer and one after another miscellaneous diseases were citedrectal cancer.<ref>{{Ravich1971}}</ref>

* In the 1980s, UTIs. [[PhimosisThomas E. Wiswell]]: as mentioned earlier(1985) claims that circumcision, true [[phimosis]] is rare and can be treated effectively without surgery. According to using a study by Blalock et almethodologically flawed report, reduces the risk of urinary tract infections. (2003)<ref name="blalock2003wiswell1985">{{REFjournal |last=BlalockWiswell |initfirst=HJThomas E. |last2init=VemulakondaTE |init2author-link=VThomas E. Wiswell |last3url=Ritchey |init3=ML |last4=Ribbeck |init4=Mhttps://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/75/5/901 |title=Outpatient management Decreased incidence of [[phimosis]] Following newborn circumcisionurinary tract infections in circumcised male infants |journal=J UrolPediatrics |date=2003May 1985 |volume=16975 |issue=65 |pages=2332901-4 |url=https://www.cirp.org/library/complications/blalock1/3 |accessdate=2019-1110-0712}}</ref>, 2.9% of those circumcised develop a post-operative  [[phimosis]], in which the circumcision scar constrictsAaron J. In [[intact]Fink] patients, the rate of [[phimosis]] is only 1% (see also the study by [[Jakob Øster]]1986). Therefore, circumcision is not a preventive measure for [[phimosis]].* Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs): a vast number of studies has been conducted on the subject of transmission of STDs.* Firstwith no evidence whatsoever, it has to be noted claims that any form of protection circumcision protects against these diseases only affects people who are sexually active. Circumcision in childhood cannot be justified on these grounds, since any assumed protective effect will not occur before the boy is already old enough to decide about circumcision for himself.* As mentioned above, the [[foreskin]] keeps the [[Glans penis|glansAIDS]] moist. This subpreputial moisture contains, among other substances, the enzyme lysozyme, which breaks up the cell wall of bacteria, thereby providing a natural antibacterial screen. This explains the results of several studies, such as Laumann et alfollowed.<refname="fink1986">{{REFjournal |last=LaumannFink |initfirst=EOAaron J. |last2init=MasiAJ |init2author-link=CM |last3=Zuckerman |init3=EWAaron J. Fink |title=Circumcision in the United States: prevalence, prophylactic effects, and sexual practiceA possible explanation for heterosexual male infection with AIDS |journal=JAMANew England Journal of Medicine |date=19971986-10-30 |volume=27731 |issue=18 |pagespage=1052-71167 |url=https://www.cirpnejm.org/librarydoi/general/laumann/ |accessdate=2019-11-06}}<full/ref>, which found a higher rate of infection with bacterial venereal diseases in [[circumcised]] than in [[intact]] men.* The studies by Fleiss et al10. (1998) support this.<ref name="fleiss-hodges-vanhowe1998">{{FleissP HodgesF VanHoweRS 1998}}<1056/ref> According to the [[AAP]], the general sexual behaviour of the male — such as frequent change in partners and the use of condoms — has a much higher impact on sexually transmitted diseases then the circumcision status.<ref>{{REFjournal |last=Task Force on Circumcision |first=NEJM198610303151818 |titleDOI=Circumcision policy statement |journal=Pediatrics |date=1999 |volume=103 |issue=3 |pages=686-93 |url=https://www.cirp10.org/library/statements/aap19991056/NEJM198610303151818 |accessdate=2019-11-1520

* [[HIV]] / [[AIDS]]: in the recent pastRetrospectively, the argument that circumcision could help to contain the spread of [[HIV]] has been stated numerous times.*:First, two notes: was always advertised as a cure for one, whatever disease was in the use of condoms is still by far public spotlight at the most effective protection against an infectiontime. During intercourse with that preventive measure, circumcision status does not make a difference[[Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.*:Secondly, the assumed protection would only affect healthy men who have intercourse with an infected womanO. An infected man can infect a women by transmission of his bodily fluids, so that his circumcision status is irrelevantC. Therefore, the use of condoms remains vital in containing the spread of [[HIV)]], which in return renders circumcision unnecessary(2016) state:<blockquote>* Due to These claims date originally from before the inevitable loss advent of sensitivity as a result of circumcisionevidence-based medicine, there is also when doctors relied on the temptation opinions of other clinicians to go without condomsinform their practice, in order not to lose even more sensitivityrather than on scientifically collected evidence.<refname="doc2016">{{REFjournalREFweb |lasturl=Hooykaashttps://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/alleged-medical-benefits/ |inittitle=CAlleged Medical Benefits |last2publisher=van der Velde[[Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.O.C.)]] |init2website=FW |last3date=van der Linden2016-05 |init3accessdate=MM2019-11-20 |etalformat=yes |titlequote=}}</ref></blockquote> The sheer mass of studies and publications that were released during those almost 180 years on this topic are the reason that even arguments that have been disproved multiple times, especially regarding infant and child circumcision, tenaciously persist up until today. An ever-recurring element of initiation rites found in many different cultures is the fixation upon the genitalia. It reflects the fascination that emerges from the ability to create new life. In most cultures, fertility is seen as the most precious good, and the body parts involved frequently find themselves in the focus of ritual acts. In many parts of the world, those rites take place when the boy reaches [[puberty]], and are meant to symbolize his transition from boy to man. The importance removal of the male [[foreskin]] is just one of many phenomena that developed in this context. They range from the removal of the frenulum in boys and men through partial or complete removal of ethnicity the [[foreskin]] up to radical operations. Australian [[Aborigines]], as mentioned above, have their [[foreskin]]s removed. It is also usual that, a few weeks later, young men have their [[penis]]es sliced open in a [[subincision]], resulting in a risk factor for STDs and sexual behaviour among heterosexualspartly or completely divided [[urethra]].  Another known, particularly massive, intervention is the stripping of the entire [[skin]] off the [[penis]]. In Indonesia, boys have metal or bamboo balls inserted into their [[penis]] shaft or [[Glans penis|journal=Genitourin Medglans]] at the beginning of [[puberty]], which form little "humps".  |date=1991For many cultures it is also common to perform similar rituals on girls. This can range from relatively small interventions such as piercing or cutting the clitoral hood, to its complete removal and up to radical removal of clitoral hood, [[clitoris]], inner and outer labia followed by sewing up the vagina. |volume=67 |issue=5''The following text is taken from the [[Circumpendium]].'' |pages=378-83-> |url=== Prophylactic claims are false ===https://www Some people claim that circumcision has prophylactic benefits.ncbiEspecially in the [[USA]] those arguments have persisted for more then a 100 years, with ever changing diseases circumcision is said to protect against.nlmAt first, these were diseases where [[masturbation]] was believed to be the cause.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1194736/pdf/genitmed00041-0022After bacteria and viruses had been discovered, arguments changed, and one after another miscellaneous diseases were cited.pdf |accessdate=2019-11-15}}</ref>* [[Phimosis]]: as mentioned earlier, true [[phimosis]] is rare and can be treated effectively without surgery. According to a study by Blalock et al. (2003)<refname="blalock2003">{{REFjournal |last=MichaelBlalock |init=RTHJ |last2=WadsworthVemulakonda |init2=JV |last3=FeinleibRitchey |init3=JML |last4=Ribbeck |etalinit4=yesM |title=Private sexual behavior, public opinion, and public health policy related to sexually transmitted diseases: a US-British comparisonOutpatient management of [[phimosis]] Following newborn circumcision |journal=Am J Public HealthUrol |date=19982003 |volume=88169 |issue=56 |pages=7492332-544 |url=https://www.ncbicirp.nlm.nih.govorg/pmclibrary/articlescomplications/PMC1508929blalock1/pdf/amjph00017-0039.pdf |accessdate=2019-11-1507}}</ref>, 2.9% of those circumcised develop a post-operative [[phimosis]], in which the circumcision scar constricts. In [[intact]] patients, the rate of [[phimosis]] is only 1% (see also the study by [[Jakob Øster]]). Therefore, circumcision is not a preventive measure for [[phimosis]].* Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs): a vast number of studies has been conducted on the subject of transmission of STDs.* First, it has to be noted that any form of protection against these diseases only affects people who are sexually active. Circumcision in childhood cannot be justified on these grounds, since any assumed protective effect will not occur before the boy is already old enough to decide about circumcision for himself.* As mentioned above, the [[foreskin]] keeps the [[Glans penis|glans]] moist. This subpreputial moisture contains, among other substances, the enzyme lysozyme, which breaks up the cell wall of bacteria, thereby providing a natural antibacterial screen. This explains the results of several studies, such as Laumann et al.<ref>{{REFjournal

* Two studies that have been published [[HIV]] / [[AIDS]]: in early 2007<ref>{{RCT Gray et al 2007}}</ref><ref>{{RCT Bailey et al 2007}}</ref>the recent past, which investigated the effectiveness of argument that circumcision as a means of reducing could help to contain the spread of [[HIV]] from infected women to heterosexual men in African high risk areas, have has been repeatedly subjected to strong criticismstated numerous times. Both studies were ended prematurely*:First, which distorted the results. The men who had been [[circumcised]] two notes: for one, the study had to stay sexually inactive during use of condoms is still by far the wound healingmost effective protection against an infection. During intercourse with that preventive measure, circumcision status does not make a difference.*:Secondly, which gave the intact control group more relative opportunity to become assumed protection would only affect healthy men who have intercourse with an infectedwoman. These African randomized clinical trials have been demonstrated to have very serious methodological and statistical errors An infected man can infect a women by transmission of his bodily fluids, so that distort the results in favor of his circumcisionstatus is irrelevant.<ref name="boyle-hill2011">{{BoyleGJ HillG 2011}}</ref> The fact that Therefore, the [[USA]] has both use of condoms remains vital in containing the highest percentage spread of [[circumcisedHIV]] males , which in return renders circumcision unnecessary* Due to the western world, inevitable loss of sensitivity as well as the highest [[HIV]] infection ratea result of circumcision, makes there is also the studies look dubious. Besides thattemptation to go without condoms, several other studies concluded that circumcision does in order not have a significant impact on the risk of infection with [[HIV]]to lose even more sensitivity.<ref>{{REFjournal |last=GrosskurthHooykaas |init=HC |last2=Moshavan der Velde |init2=FFW |last3=Toddvan der Linden |init3=JMM

|title=A community trial The importance of the impact of improved sexually transmitted disease treatment on the HIV epidemic in rural Tanzania: 2. Baseline survey resultsethnicity as a risk factor for STDs and sexual behaviour among heterosexuals |journal=AIDSGenitourin Med |date=19951991 |volume=967 |issue=85 |pages=927378-3483 |url=https://insightswww.ncbi.ovidnlm.com/aidsnih.gov/aidspmc/1995articles/08PMC1194736/000pdf/communitygenitmed00041-trial-impact-improved-sexually/15/000020300022.pdf

|last=BarongoMichael |init=LRRT |last2=BorgdorffWadsworth |init2=MWJ |last3=MoshaFeinleib |init3=FFJ

|title=The epidemiology of HIV-1 infection in urban areasPrivate sexual behavior, public opinion, roadside settlements and rural villages in Mwanza Region, Tanzaniapublic health policy related to sexually transmitted diseases: a US-British comparison |journal=AIDSAm J Public Health |date=19921998 |volume=688 |issue=125 |pages=1521749-854 |url=https://journalswww.lwwncbi.comnlm.nih.gov/aidsonlinepmc/abstractarticles/1992PMC1508929/12000pdf/the_epidemiology_of_hiv_1_infection_in_urbanamjph00017-0039.16.aspxpdf |accessdate=20252019-0311-1715}}</ref> <ref>{{REFconferenceREFjournal |last=Changedia SM, Gilada ISLaumann |firstinit=EO |titlelast2=Role of male circumcision in HIV transmission insignificant in conjugal relationship (abstract no. ThPeC7420)Masi |urlinit2=CM |placelast3=Barcelona, SpainZuckerman |sourceinit3=Presented at the Fourteenth International AIDS ConferenceEW |datefromtitle=2002-07-07 |dateto=2002-07-12 |accessdate=}}</ref><ref>{{REFconference |last=Connolly CACircumcision in the United States: prevalence, Shishana Oprophylactic effects, Simbayi L, Colvin M |first= |title=HIV and circumcision in South Africa (Abstract No. MoPeC3491)sexual practice |urljournal=JAMA |placedate=Bangkok, Thailand1997 |sourcevolume=Presented at the 15th International AIDS Conference277 |datefromissue=2004-07-11 |datetopages=2004-071052-16 |accessdate=}}</ref><ref>{{REFconference |last=Thomas AG, Bakhireva LN, Brodine SK, Shaffer RA |first= |title=Prevalence of male circumcision and its association with HIV and sexually transmitted infections in a U.S. navy population (Abstract no. TuPeC4861)7 |url=https://citeseerxwww.istcirp.psu.eduorg/library/general/laumann/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=e0f66eb069de9330e88295e6280a8a47a22b74ed |place=Bangkok, Thailand |source=Presented at the 15th International AIDS Conference |datefrom=2004-07-11 |dateto=2004-07-16 |format=PDF |accessdate=2019-11-1506

* Urinary tract infections (UTI): Two studies that have been published in early 2007<ref>{{RCT Gray et al 2007}}</ref><ref>{{RCT Bailey et al 2007}}</ref>, which investigated the effectiveness of circumcision as a means of reducing the spread of [[HIV]] from infected women to heterosexual men in African high risk areas, have been repeatedly subjected to strong criticism. Both studies were ended prematurely, which distorted the results. The men who had been [[UTIcircumcised]] can be effectively treated with antibioticsfor the study had to stay sexually inactive during the wound healing, which gave the intact control group more relative opportunity to become infected. These African randomized clinical trials have been demonstrated to have very serious methodological and statistical errors that distort the results in favor of circumcision.<ref name="boyle-hill2011">{{BoyleGJ HillG 2011}}</ref> The fact that the [[USA]] has both the highest percentage of [[circumcised]] males in the western world, as well as the highest [[HIV]] infection rate, this was also proven by makes the studieslook dubious. Besides that, several other studies concluded that circumcision does not have a significant impact on the risk of infection with [[HIV]].<ref>{{REFjournal |last=McCrackenGrosskurth |init=GH |last2=Mosha |init2=F |last3=Todd |init3=J |etal=yes |title=Options in antimicrobial management A community trial of the impact of urinary tract infections improved sexually transmitted disease treatment on the HIV epidemic in infants and childrenrural Tanzania: 2. Baseline survey results |journal=Pediatr Infect Dis JAIDS |date=19891995 |volume=89

|pages=552927-534 |url=https://wwwinsights.cirpovid.orgcom/libraryaids/diseaseaids/UTI1995/mccracken08/000/community-trial-impact-improved-sexually/15/00002030 |accessdate=2019-11-1915

|last=LarcombeBarongo |init=JLR |last2=Borgdorff |init2=MW |last3=Mosha |init3=FF |etal=yes |title=Urinary tract The epidemiology of HIV-1 infection in childrenurban areas, roadside settlements and rural villages in Mwanza Region, Tanzania |journal=BMJAIDS |date=19991992 |volume=3196 |issue=12 |pages=11731521-8 |url=https://journals.lww.com/aidsonline/abstract/1992/12000/the_epidemiology_of_hiv_1_infection_in_urban.16.aspx |accessdate=2025-503-17}}</ref> <ref>{{REFconference |last=Changedia SM, Gilada IS |first= |title=Role of male circumcision in HIV transmission insignificant in conjugal relationship (abstract no. ThPeC7420)

}}</ref> A Swedish study<ref>{{REFjournalREFconference |last=MårildConnolly CA, Shishana O, Simbayi L, Colvin M |initfirst=S |last2=Jodal |init2=U |title=Incidence rate of first–time symptomatic urinary tract infection HIV and circumcision in children under 6 years of age |journal=Acta Paediatr |date=1998 |volume=87 |issue=5 |pages=549-52South Africa (Abstract No. MoPeC3491)

}}</ref> found that<ref>{{REFconference |last=Thomas AG, during the Bakhireva LN, Brodine SK, Shaffer RA |first 6 years = |title=Prevalence of lifemale circumcision and its association with HIV and sexually transmitted infections in a U.S. navy population (Abstract no. TuPeC4861) |url=https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=e0f66eb069de9330e88295e6280a8a47a22b74ed |place=Bangkok, Thailand |source=Presented at the incidence of 15th International AIDS Conference |datefrom=2004-07-11 |dateto=2004-07-16 |format=PDF |accessdate=2019-11-15}}</ref>* Urinary tract infections (UTI): a [[UTI]]s in boys was 1.8%can be effectively treated with antibiotics, but in girls this was 6.6%. UTIs are less common in boys after the first year of life. Mueller et alalso proven by studies. <ref>{{REFjournal |last=MuellerMcCracken |init=ERG |last2title=SteinhardtOptions in antimicrobial management of urinary tract infections in infants and children |init2journal=GPediatr Infect Dis J |date=1989 |volume=8 |issue=8 |pages=552-5 |url=https://www.cirp.org/library/disease/UTI/mccracken/ |accessdate=2019-11-19}}</ref><ref>{{REFjournal |last3last=NaseerLarcombe |init3init=SJ |title=The incidence of genitourinary abnormalities in [[circumcised]] and [[uncircumcised]] boys presenting with an initial urinary Urinary tract infection by 6 months of agein children |journal=PediatricsBMJ |date=19971999 |volume=100 (Supplement)319 |issue= |pagepages=5801173-5

}}</ref> did not find a significant difference in UTI rates between [[circumcised]] and [[intact]] boys with normal urinary tract anatomy.* Other studies suggest that circumcision is more likely to raise than to lower the generally low risk of acquiring UTI: multiple studies from [[Israel]] showed a strong correlation between ritual circumcision on the 8th day of life and postoperative UTI.A Swedish study<ref>{{REFjournal |last=MenahemMårild

|last2=Jodal |init2=U |title=Incidence rate of first–time symptomatic urinary tract infection in children under 6 years of age |journal=Acta Paediatr |date=1998 |volume=87 |issue=5 |pages=549-52 |url= |accessdate=}}</ref> found that, during the first 6 years of life, the incidence of [[UTI]]s in boys was 1.8%, but in girls was 6.6%. UTIs are less common in boys after the first year of life. Mueller et al. <ref>{{REFjournal |last=Mueller |init=ER |last2=Steinhardt |init2=G |last3=Naseer |init3=S |title=The incidence of genitourinary abnormalities in [[circumcised]] and [[uncircumcised]] boys presenting with an initial urinary tract infection by 6 months of age |journal=Pediatrics |date=1997 |volume=100 (Supplement) |issue= |page=580 |url= |accessdate=}}</ref> did not find a significant difference in UTI rates between [[circumcised]] and [[intact]] boys with normal urinary tract anatomy.* Other studies suggest that circumcision is more likely to raise than to lower the generally low risk of acquiring UTI: multiple studies from [[Israel]] showed a strong correlation between ritual circumcision on the 8th day of life and postoperative UTI.<ref>{{REFjournal |last=Menahem |init=S |title=Complications arising from ritual circumcision: pathogenesis and possible prevention |journal=Isr J Med Sci |date=1981

Yang et al. (2025) report a "significant" decline in the incidence of circumcision over a ten-year period and that only a minority of American boys are being [[circumcised]] in the newborn period. <ref name="yang2025">{{REFjournal |last=Yang |first= |init=P |author-link= |last2=Zhu |first2= |init2=X |author2-link= |last3=Patel |first3= |init3=EU |author3-link= |last4=Quin |first4= |init4=PC |author4-link= |last5=Grabowski |first5= |init5=MK |author5-link= |last6=Tobian |first6= |init6=AAR |author6-link=Aaron Tobian |etal=no |title=Trends in Circumcision Among Newborn Males in the US |trans-title= |language= |journal=JAMA Pediatrics |location= |date=2025-10-02 |season= |volume= |issue= |article=e252464 |page= |pages= |url=https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2838312 |archived= |quote= |pubmedID=40952753 |pubmedCID=12439174 |DOI=10.1001/jamapediatrics.2025.2464 |accessdate=2025-09-17}}</ref> Although the incidence of [[circumcision of the newborn]] has been gradually declining for decades, this is the first study to report an overall incidence of less than fifty percent. Based on this new information, we can now report that [[intactness]] is now the NORM among the newborn boys of America.