Smegma: Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) m Revise text |
m using Template:MD |
||
| Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
Circumcision advocates of the past who alleged a relationship between "lack of circumcision" and genital cancers formerly implicated smegma or smegma-borne pathogens as the causative agent. Only two histologic studies of human smegma have ever been conducted, both of which found it to be perfectly harmless. | Circumcision advocates of the past who alleged a relationship between "lack of circumcision" and genital cancers formerly implicated smegma or smegma-borne pathogens as the causative agent. Only two histologic studies of human smegma have ever been conducted, both of which found it to be perfectly harmless. | ||
The hypothesis that human male smegma is carcinogenic was first formulated in 1932 by circumcision promoter [[Abraham L. Wolbarst]], | The hypothesis that human male smegma is carcinogenic was first formulated in 1932 by circumcision promoter [[Abraham L. Wolbarst]], {{MD}}<ref>{{REFjournal | ||
|last=Wolbarst | |last=Wolbarst | ||
|init=AL | |init=AL | ||