15,658
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| title=The Joy of Uncircumcising! Restore Your Birthright and Maximize Sexual Pleasure
| last=
| first=
| publisher=
| work=
| date=
| accessdate=
}}</ref><ref>{{REFweb
→Physical aspects: more editing.
Foreskin regeneration is only theoretical as of 2019. No foreskin has ever been regenerated. There is no assurance that foreskin regenration will actually be successful.
== Physical aspects ==
Nonsurgical foreskin restoration does not restore portions of the [[Frenulum of prepuce of penis|frenulum]] or the [[ridged band]] removed during circumcision. Although not commonly performed, there are surgical [http://intactwiki.org/wiki/Category:Foreskin_restoration_touch-up_surgeries "touch-up" techniques] that can re-create some of the functionality of the frenulum and dartos muscle.<ref>Bigelow, Jim. The Joy of Uncircumcising!, pp. 188-191.</ref>
The process of foreskin restoration seeks to regenerate some of the tissue removed by circumcisionby expansion of residual tissue, as well as providing coverage of the glans. According to research, the foreskin comprises over half of the skin and mucosa of the human penis.<ref>{{REFjournal
| last=Taylor
| first=JR
}}</ref>
Some men who have undertaken foreskin restoration report a visibly smoother glans, which some of these men attribute to decreased levels of [[keratinization]] following restoration. A study that investigated the effect of glans coverage on levels of keratinisation keratinization found no difference in keratin levels<ref>{{REFweb
| quote=
| url=http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/320/7249/1592
| coauthors=Thaler, Lea; Kukkonen, Tuuli; Carrier, Serge; and [[Irving M. Binik|Binik, Yitzchak]]
| title=Sensation and Sexual Arousal in Circumcised and Uncircumcised Men
| journal=Journal of sexual medicineJ Sex Med
| volume=4
| issue=3
| pubmedCID=
| DOI=10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00471.x
| date=May 2007-05 | accessdate=2019-09-30}}</ref> while others The work of Masters & Johnson (1966) has been shown to have severe methodological flaws that render their conclusions innaccurate and essentially useless. The work of Bleustein and Payne (2007) is similarly flawed by methodological faults. Others have reported that it is more sensitive sensation in uncircumcised intact males.<ref name="sorrels">{{REFjournal
| last=Sorrells
| first=
| issue=4
| pages=328-330
| url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5370953_Circumcision_affects_glans_penis_vibration_perception_threshold
| quote=
| pubmedID=18481425
| pubmedCID=
| DOI=
| date=April 2008-09-14 | accessdate=2019-09-30}}</ref> It has been suggested that the perceived sensitivity gains of the glans reported by some men are psychological, with glans sensitivity itself being unaffected.<ref>{{REFwebREFjournal | quotelast=Kirby | first=RS | coauthors= | title=The Joy of Uncircumcising! Restore your birthright and maximize sexual pleasure | journal=BMJ | date=1994-09-10 | volume=309 | issue= | pages=679
| url=http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/309/6955/679/a
| quote=
| urlpubmedID=http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/309/6955/679/a#43129 | titlepubmedCID=Circumcision and uncircumcision | last= | first= | publisher= | work= | dateDOI=10.1136/bmj.309.6955.679a | accessdate=2019-9-29
}}</ref>