Changes

2017, intactivist [[Hannes Müller]] meticulously investigated where the argument of the '''20,000 nerve endings''' in the male [[foreskin]] used by so many [[intactivists]] comes from and whether it applies. He has summarized his findings in a document that we are happy to fully reproduce here.

== Demythologization of the "20,000 nerve endings” legend ==

}}

I wish to thank [[Ulf Dunkel]] and [[Lindsay R. Watson]] for support and advice in the preparation of this article and [[Ken McGrath]] for giving his consent and information about anatomy and innervation of the [[foreskin]].<ref name="Approvals">Approvals to the first publication by e-mail to the author: see below</ref>

=== The myth ===

==== Nerve endings in the [[foreskin]] / Quarter (25-US-Ct.) ====

1995, in the film "[[Whose Body, Whose Rights?]]"<ref name="WhoseBody" /> starting from Montagu's description of the number of nerve endings in normal skin, the number of nerve endings in the [[foreskin]] was calculated as follows: “15 square inches comfortably fits 15 quarters. This analogy helps us to understand that the adult [[foreskin]] contains … over 1000 nerve endings …" (15 × more than 50 = more than 750), which NOHARMM supplements to "Since Dr. Taylor's research suggests that the [[foreskin]] is '''more densely enervated than "normal" skin''', a circumcised man likely loses many times more than 1,000 nerve endings.”<ref name="circumcisionharm" />^b

==== The “ridged band" ====

In 1996 the article by the Canadian pathologist [[John R. Taylor]] et al.<ref name="Taylor" /> about the “ridged band” of the [[foreskin]] had appeared. Taylor reported, that the encapsulated nerve endings<ref>Nerve endings can be divided into types with or without end corpuscles (corpuscular/encapsulated or free nerve endings). “… the free nerve endings (FNE) … do not seem to have any part in fine touch sensation (they are innervated by unmyelinated axons which conduct too slowly, don’t have specialised end corpuscles to transduce vibration, etc. and have a high threshold, all of which prevent the conduction of fine touch).” [[Ken McGrath|McGrath]], Fn 29b</ref> of the [[foreskin]] are concentrated in the “ridged band” and thus are distributed very differently. In his article, Fleiss also mentions the "ridged mucosa" and calls Taylor as a source. He therefore knew of Taylor’s work.

==== Nerve endings in the [[foreskin]] / 1cm² ====

In 1997 Fleiss knew from Bazett et al. (1932).<ref name="bazett1932" />,<ref name="JAMA" /> that they had counted 212 nerve endings within a 1cm²-piece of a single [[foreskin]] tissue (Table 1, p. 492). Now it is obvious that Fleiss reckoned similarly therewith and with the [[foreskin]] size of 15 sq.inch = 96.8 cm² (or with 8×13 = 104 cm²): 96.8 cm²×212 nerve endings / cm² = 20,522 nerve endings (or 104×212 = 22,048; short: 100×>200= >20,000). So he obviously came to "more than 20,000 nerve endings".

==== Not a “logical extrapolation”<ref name="galleryIntact" /> ====

It is completely insufficient, outgoing from only one single 1cm²-piece of prepuce tissue and the greatly different distribution of the nerve endings therein, to derive from it generally a number of nerve endings of the [[foreskin]] as a whole. This is all the more true, if it is not known where exactly the tissue was taken from on the [[foreskin]], and how old it was.

=== The widespread dissemination of the legend ===

'''2002''' Fleiss and Hodges published: “What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Circumcision“<ref name="SweetDreams" />b. According to the book: "the [[foreskin]] contains … tens of thousands of specialized erogenic nerve endings …"(S.2f).

These and many other publications have spread the legend of “20,000 …” widely.<ref name="Appendix" /> Often, the legend is made more believable by giving the impression that it is verifiable. So it is often linked in publications with a ref. note, which does not mention the number, like at first 1997 in the article of Fleiss<ref name="Fleiss" />,<ref name="schariagegner">in: beschneidung-von-jungen.de/Nachteile, also in: https://schariagegner.wordpress.com/2013/12/28/</ref>. Sometimes the impression is given that a figure which is the maximum is average<ref name="Fn11b" />,<ref name="ForeskinSize" />,<ref>a.) according to McGrath’s e-mail from 18.09.2017 to the author: “… the message to which he refers was from another of the colleagues who inflated the figure.” b.) In an e-mail from 27.09.2017 to the author [[Ken McGrath|McGrath]] writes: “I have no idea where the ’70,000’ number comes from. It is even more impossible, absurd even, than the 20,000 estimate. It is probably representative of the inflation of the number brought on by wishfull thinking and should be ignored.”</ref>, or nerves are referred to instead of nerve endings<ref>intaktiv e.V.-Flyer, German ²2016: http://intaktiv.de/downloads/flyer/ ; Fn 21, 2015; Fn 22, 1. Link</ref> – a big difference in number.

=== McGrath's estimate ===

| Author=[[Ken McGrath]]

}}

In '''2017''', [[Ken McGrath]] confirms his estimate from 1998<ref>McGrath’s statement in a contribution to a yet unpublished book (emphasis from author), made available to the author by forwarded email from L.R. Watson to [[Ulf Dunkel]] on May 31, 2017.</ref>:

| Author=[[Ken McGrath]]

}}

=== A purely quantitative consideration for plausibility speaking against “20,000 nerve endings” in the [[foreskin]] ===

The genital tissue by male and woman is probably not so far different. The difference is mainly in the form and the nerve endings are differently distributed in detail, but on the whole their number maybe nearly equal. The [[Glans penis|glans]] of the [[penis]] may have 4k and the clitoris 8k. If the [[foreskin]] for instance has 10k, then the number of nerve endings in the whole would be 14k, so that the non-clitoridal genital has 6k, with the same total number in men and women. If the [[foreskin]] has 12k, then there is 16k together with the [[Glans penis|glans]], and the non-clitoridal genital has the same as the clitoris: each 8k. If the female non-clitoidal genital has less than the clitoris, for example max. 6k, ie together max. 14k, then stays for the [[foreskin]] max. 10k. – Gender equality seems possible: for the whole 12k, clitoris or [[foreskin]] 8k, non-clitoridal genital or [[Glans penis|glans]] 4k.

=== Conclusion ===

It is time to take leave of the exaggerated number of 20,000 nerve endings in the [[foreskin]].<ref>If you want to name a number, you should only specify the order of magnitude >3,000 <10,000. The number of nerve endings in the [[foreskin]] is probably at least 4,000, since the [[Glans penis|glans]] already has 4,000 and the [[foreskin]] is more sensitive – but this is not qualitatively differentiated, for instance between sensitivity to pain or touch.</ref> This legend is very wide spread by the opponents of circumcision. As long as the number cannot be scientifically proven, it is sufficient to say that the prepuce is very densely innervated and for fine touch is more sensitive than the [[Glans penis|glans]]<ref name="Approvals" />,<ref name="Appendix" />. Otherwise, the credibility and persuasive power of the Intactivist movement suffers and makes itself unnecessarily vulnerable. Unfortunately, this can also be seen on the Internet.

| Author=Konfuzius

}}

----

== Appendix: Documentary Part – Internet research by [[Hannes Müller]] ==

First release: May 12, 2017, revised and enhanced: Dec 12, 2017

=== The legend of "20,000 nerve endings" ===

* '''[[Giordano Bruno Foundation|gbs]]-Flyer "My body belongs to me!"''' of the AK Children's Rights, 2012<ref>www.pro-kinderrechte.de</ref>: "„[…] within it [the [[foreskin]]] some 20,000 sensitive receptors run together" - without proof.

* '''Fleiss on [[Mothers Against Circumcision|MothersAgainstCirc.org]]'''<ref>http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/fleiss.html</ref>: The Case Against Circumcision, Paul M. Fleiss, 1997: “Circumcision denudes: … circumcision cuts off … 240 feet of nerves, and more than 20,000 nerve endings. [H. C. Bazett et al., "Depth, Distribution and Probable Identification in the Prepuce of Sensory End-Organs Concerned in Sensations of Temperature and Touch; Thermometric Conductivity," Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry 27 (1932): 489-517]” - There is no proof for "20,000"!

=== Approvals to the first publication by e-mail to the author ===

* [[Ulf Dunkel]] (intactivist, editor of the IntactiWiki, translator and editor of several books on circumcision)

* [[Lindsay R. Watson]] (author and editor of „[[Unspeakable Mutilations]] – Circumcised Men Speak Out“, New Zealand)

* [[Robert Darby]] (medical historian, New Zealand)

* [[Brian Earp|Brian D. Earp]] (medical ethicist, Oxford)