Circumcision study flaws: Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) →USA: Add text. |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) →USA: Add text. |
||
| Line 379: | Line 379: | ||
The new policy was finally published in an unusual two-part article in the September 2012 issue of ''Pediatrics''. It immediately received an unrelenting and on-going storm of adverse critical comment: | The new policy was finally published in an unusual two-part article in the September 2012 issue of ''Pediatrics''. It immediately received an unrelenting and on-going storm of adverse critical comment: | ||
* {{REFweb | |||
|url=https://intactamerica.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/my-letter-to-the-american-academy-of-pediatrics/ | |||
|archived= | |||
|title=My Letter to the American Academy of Pediatrics | |||
|trans-title= | |||
|language=English | |||
|last=Chapin | |||
|first=Georganne | |||
|author-link= | |||
|publisher=Intact America | |||
|website=https://intactamerica.wordpress.com | |||
|date=2012-08-31 | |||
|accessdate=2020-08-03 | |||
|format= | |||
|quote=How can you approve a report that extols the benefits of removing the foreskin, a normal body part, without one single word devoted to the function of that body part, or why it’s there in the first place? | |||
}} | |||
* {{REFdocument | * {{REFdocument | ||