Child circumcision: Difference between revisions

mNo edit summary
Wikify.
Line 116: Line 116:
}}</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.
}}</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.


Bollinger (2025) enumerated the 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
[[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
  |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
  |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394517060_Policy_Paper_Newborn_Circumcision_as_a_Negative_Wellness_Factor