IntactiWiki

Circumcision study flaws: Difference between revisions

← Older editNewer edit →
WikiAdmin (talk | contribs)
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,834 edits
WikiAdmin (talk | contribs)
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,834 edits
m adjusted REFjournal
WikiAdmin (talk | contribs)
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,834 edits
m using template BoyleGJ HillG 2011
Line 129: Line 129:
=== Australasia ===
=== Australasia ===


The [https://www.racp.edu.au Royal Australasian College of Physicians] (2010) released a 28-page updated position statement on non-therapeutic circumcision of boys in September 2010. This statement is deeply flawed and outmoded in 2020. It seems to be designed to protect the physicians' income from performing non-therapeutic circumcision. The statement accepts at face value the false, now disproved,<ref name="boyle-hill2011">{{REFjournal
The [https://www.racp.edu.au Royal Australasian College of Physicians] (2010) released a 28-page updated position statement on non-therapeutic circumcision of boys in September 2010. This statement is deeply flawed and outmoded in 2020. It seems to be designed to protect the physicians' income from performing non-therapeutic circumcision. The statement accepts at face value the false, now disproved,<ref name="boyle-hill2011">{{BoyleGJ HillG 2011}}</ref> claims that circumcision reduces the risk of HIV by 60 percent. The statement shows only limited understanding of the functions of the foreskin. While it recognizes the protective function, it does not recognize the immunological function or sexual function, and shows only limited understanding of the erogenous function. The RACP places parental preference above child human rights. Nevertheless, public hospitals in [[Australia]] have banned performance of non-therapeutic circumcisions<ref>{{REFnews
|last=Boyle
|first=Gregory J.
|init=GJ
|author-link=Gregory J. Boyle
|last2=Hill
|first2=George
|init2=G
|author2-link=George Hill
|title=Sub-Saharan African randomised clinical trials into male circumcision and HIV transmission: Methodological, ethical and legal concerns
|journal=J Law Med
|date=2011-12
|volume=19
|issue=2
|pages=316-334
|url=http://www.salem-news.com/fms/pdf/2011-12_JLM-Boyle-Hill.pdf
|pubmedID=22320006
|accessdate=2020-07-31
}}</ref> claims that circumcision reduces the risk of HIV by 60 percent. The statement shows only limited understanding of the functions of the foreskin. While it recognizes the protective function, it does not recognize the immunological function or sexual function, and shows only limited understanding of the erogenous function. The RACP places parental preference above child human rights. Nevertheless, public hospitals in [[Australia]] have banned performance of non-therapeutic circumcisions<ref>{{REFnews
  |title=Cosmetic circumcision banned
  |title=Cosmetic circumcision banned
  |url=http://www.cirp.org/news/theadvertiser2007-11-12/
  |url=http://www.cirp.org/news/theadvertiser2007-11-12/
Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/Circumcision_study_flaws"