Australia: Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) |
m wikify HIV |
||
| Line 384: | Line 384: | ||
Na et al. (2015) considered whether Australian boys should be circumcised. They concluded: | Na et al. (2015) considered whether Australian boys should be circumcised. They concluded: | ||
<blockquote>In conclusion, although there is a benefit of circumcision in those with urogenital tract anomalies, in a healthy newborn,the disease in the foreskin is non-existent. There is insufficient scientific evidence to support routine newborn circumcision in Australia done for UTI risk and HIV transmission issues alone. Therefore, any surgical complication and financial cost of routine newborn circumcision for these reasons in Australia currently cannot be justified. From a medical point of view, the‘price’ is still too high.<ref name="na2015">{{REFjournal | <blockquote>In conclusion, although there is a benefit of circumcision in those with urogenital tract anomalies, in a healthy newborn,the disease in the foreskin is non-existent. There is insufficient scientific evidence to support routine newborn circumcision in Australia done for UTI risk and [[HIV]] transmission issues alone. Therefore, any surgical complication and financial cost of routine newborn circumcision for these reasons in Australia currently cannot be justified. From a medical point of view, the‘price’ is still too high.<ref name="na2015">{{REFjournal | ||
|last=Na | |last=Na | ||
|first=Angelika F. | |first=Angelika F. | ||
| Line 457: | Line 457: | ||
===Continuing decline in practice of non-therapeutic circumcision=== | ===Continuing decline in practice of non-therapeutic circumcision=== | ||
Na, Tanny & Hutson (2015) discussed the matter of non-therapeutic circumcision of children in Australia. They concluded: | Na, Tanny & Hutson (2015) discussed the matter of non-therapeutic circumcision of children in Australia. They concluded: | ||
<blockquote>There is insufficient scientific evidence to support routine newborn circumcision in Australia done for UTI risk and HIV transmission issues alone. Therefore, any surgical complication and financial cost of routine newborn circumcision for these reasons in Australia currently cannot be justified. From a medical point of view, the ‘price’ is still too high.<ref>{{REFjournal | <blockquote>There is insufficient scientific evidence to support routine newborn circumcision in Australia done for UTI risk and [[HIV]] transmission issues alone. Therefore, any surgical complication and financial cost of routine newborn circumcision for these reasons in Australia currently cannot be justified. From a medical point of view, the ‘price’ is still too high.<ref>{{REFjournal | ||
|last=Na | |last=Na | ||
|first=Angelika F. | |first=Angelika F. | ||
| Line 500: | Line 500: | ||
According to a report on SBS,<ref>{{REFweb | According to a report on SBS,<ref>{{REFweb | ||
|url=https://www.sbs.com.au/news/why-is-the-number-of-male-circumcisions-declining-in-australia/7ed6f0f3-23a2-4717-a125-494bd6554b7f | |url=https://www.sbs.com.au/news/why-is-the-number-of-male-circumcisions-declining-in-australia/7ed6f0f3-23a2-4717-a125-494bd6554b7f | ||
|title=Why is the number of male circumcisions declining in Australia? | |title=Why is the number of male circumcisions declining in Australia? | ||
|last=Yosufzai | |last=Yosufzai | ||
|first=Rashida | |first=Rashida | ||