Bias: Difference between revisions
Created page with "{{Infobox | bodystyle = float:right; valign:top; | title = Pro-Circumcision Bias | titlestyle = | image = 175px | imagestyl..." |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
American bias in favor of circumcision could be attributed to a number of different factors. The history of circumcision in America goes back at least a century, when it began as a way to curb masturbation in boys and men.<ref name='Stay Free!'>{{ | American bias in favor of circumcision could be attributed to a number of different factors. The history of circumcision in America goes back at least a century, when it began as a way to curb masturbation in boys and men.<ref name='Stay Free!'>{{REFweb | ||
| quote=The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic... | | quote=The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic... | ||
| last=McLaren | | last=McLaren | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
| work=Stay Free! Magazine | | work=Stay Free! Magazine | ||
| date= | | date= | ||
| | | title=Porn Flakes: Kellogg, Graham, and the Crusade for Moral Fiber | ||
| url=http://www.ibiblio.org/stayfree/10/graham.htm | | url=http://www.ibiblio.org/stayfree/10/graham.htm | ||
| accessdate=2011-03-06 | | accessdate=2011-03-06 | ||
| Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
== "Anti-circumcision bias" == | == "Anti-circumcision bias" == | ||
Advocates of circumcision may claim there is an "anti-circumcision bias" in research and in public health policy. They support their claim only with their judgment that substantial medical evidence favors their view.<ref>Schoen E, Wiswell T, Moses S. New policy on circumcision: Cause for concern. Pediatrics 2000; 105: 620-623.</ref> It is significant that circumcision advocates never offer any rationale or research to explain why someone would have an anti-circumcision bias and why, for example, some circumcised men, Jews, and doctors who performed routine circumcisions (and stopped) would adopt a position opposing circumcision that is not evidence-based.<ref>{{ | Advocates of circumcision may claim there is an "anti-circumcision bias" in research and in public health policy. They support their claim only with their judgment that substantial medical evidence favors their view.<ref>Schoen E, Wiswell T, Moses S. New policy on circumcision: Cause for concern. Pediatrics 2000; 105: 620-623.</ref> It is significant that circumcision advocates never offer any rationale or research to explain why someone would have an anti-circumcision bias and why, for example, some circumcised men, Jews, and doctors who performed routine circumcisions (and stopped) would adopt a position opposing circumcision that is not evidence-based.<ref>{{REFweb | ||
| quote=Circumcision was more often supported by doctors who were circumcised. | | quote=Circumcision was more often supported by doctors who were circumcised. | ||
| last= | | last= | ||
| Line 125: | Line 125: | ||
| work= | | work= | ||
| date= | | date= | ||
| | | title=Cultural and Medical Bias | ||
| url=http://www.circumcision.org/bias.htm | | url=http://www.circumcision.org/bias.htm | ||
| accessdate=2011-05-10 | | accessdate=2011-05-10 | ||
