Smegma: Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) m Revise link. |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) →Smegma was falsely believed to be carcinogenic: Revise heading. |
||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
Smegma is usually washed away for cosmetic reasons. Excessive washing and use of soap inside the [[foreskin]] should be avoided.<ref name="birley1933" /> | Smegma is usually washed away for cosmetic reasons. Excessive washing and use of soap inside the [[foreskin]] should be avoided.<ref name="birley1933" /> | ||
== Smegma was falsely | == Smegma was falsely claimed to be carcinogenic == | ||
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. | ||
| Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
[[Robert S. Van Howe|Van Howe]] & Hodges (2006) concluded: "The purpose of the scientific method is to distinguish between wishful thinking, strongly held opinion, and provable fact. The smegma theory of disease, which began as wishful thinking on the part of circumcision zealots such as [[Abraham L. Wolbarst|Abraham Wolbarst]] and [[Abraham Ravich]], has evolved into irrefutable dogma, but as modern physicians, we need to recognize that, until proved otherwise, smegma is harmless."<ref name="vanhowe2006" /> | [[Robert S. Van Howe|Van Howe]] & Hodges (2006) concluded: "The purpose of the scientific method is to distinguish between wishful thinking, strongly held opinion, and provable fact. The smegma theory of disease, which began as wishful thinking on the part of circumcision zealots such as [[Abraham L. Wolbarst|Abraham Wolbarst]] and [[Abraham Ravich]], has evolved into irrefutable dogma, but as modern physicians, we need to recognize that, until proved otherwise, smegma is harmless."<ref name="vanhowe2006" /> | ||
==Video== | ==Video== | ||
<br> | <br> | ||