Bias: Difference between revisions

Line 184:

|volume=105

|pages=682-683

}}</ref> The voices of Jewish doctors — [[Abraham L. Wolbarst|Wolbarst]], Ravich, Weiss, [[Aaron J. Fink| Fink]], [[Edgar J. Schoen|Schoen]], and others — are disproportionately prominent in circumcision advocacy.

}}</ref> The voices of Jewish doctors — [[Abraham L. Wolbarst|Wolbarst]], [[Abraham Ravich|Ravich]], Weiss, [[Aaron J. Fink| Fink]], [[Edgar J. Schoen|Schoen]], and others — are disproportionately prominent in circumcision advocacy.

Although physicians may act with what they consider to be sound medical judgement, some Jewish physicians may be influenced also by non-medical consideration. Cultural background of many Jewish circumcision advocates predisposes them to view the practice in a positive light, to welcome evidence that the most particular and problematic religious custom of their people is medically beneficial, and to dismiss arguments to the contrary. The presence of a large and influential population of Jewish physicians in this country, their concentration in leading centers of research and publication, and their remarkably active participation in the century-long debate on circumcision seems too obvious and too significant to be rejected out of hand, or worse, to be avoided because it might be wrongly interpreted as gratuitous defamation.<ref>{{REFbook

@@ Line 184: / Line 184: @@
   |volume=105
   |pages=682-683
-}}</ref> The voices of Jewish doctors — [[Abraham L. Wolbarst|Wolbarst]], Ravich, Weiss, [[Aaron J. Fink| Fink]], [[Edgar J. Schoen|Schoen]], and others — are disproportionately prominent in circumcision advocacy.
+}}</ref> The voices of Jewish doctors — [[Abraham L. Wolbarst|Wolbarst]], [[Abraham Ravich|Ravich]], Weiss, [[Aaron J. Fink| Fink]], [[Edgar J. Schoen|Schoen]], and others — are disproportionately prominent in circumcision advocacy.
 Although physicians may act with what they consider to be sound medical judgement, some Jewish physicians may be influenced also by non-medical consideration. Cultural background of many Jewish circumcision advocates predisposes them to view the practice in a positive light, to welcome evidence that the most particular and problematic religious custom of their people is medically beneficial, and to dismiss arguments to the contrary. The presence of a large and influential population of Jewish physicians in this country, their concentration in leading centers of research and publication, and their remarkably active participation in the century-long debate on circumcision seems too obvious and too significant to be rejected out of hand, or worse, to be avoided because it might be wrongly interpreted as gratuitous defamation.<ref>{{REFbook