Changes

The myth that [[circumcision ]] rendered males immune to penile cancer was invented in 1932 by a New York doctor named [[Abraham L. Wolbarst]], {{MD}}<ref name="Wolbarst 1932">{{Wolbarst1932}}</ref> Wolbarst wrote an article that was published in ''The Lancet'' in 1932, implicating human male [[smegma]] as carcinogenic.<ref name="Wolbarst 1932"/> His hypothesis had absolutely no basis in valid scientific and epidemiological research.<ref name="FleissPM HodgesFM 1996">{{REFjournal

Wolbarst's opinion piece led to the perpetuation of the myth that penile cancer could not happen to males that were circumcised in infancy. This myth was completely disproven when Boczko et al. (1979) reported the 9th documented case of penile cancer in a man who had been [[circumcised ]] in infancy from the time of Wolbarst's opinion piece to the time of the report in 1968 (though they would maintain that "performing [circumcision] in infancy continues to be the most effective prophylactic measure against penile carcinoma").<ref name="boczko1979">{{REFjournal

}}</ref> Boczko et al. (1979) wrote: ''"The diagnosis in our patient was made late, as in the other cases reported, perhaps because the disease was presumed not to occur in those [[circumcised ]] in infancy. This is clearly not so. Although rare, the diagnosis must be considered when evaluating a penile lesion even in a circumcised individual."''

}}</ref>, it becomes clear that the assertion that [[circumcision ]] eliminates the risk of penile cancer is categorically false, although some circumcision advocates continue to make this assertion.

Advocates of circumcision may yet point to the aforementioned studies and highlight that the incidence of penile cancer was still lower in the [[circumcised ]] groups of men studied, than it was in the [[intact ]] group, and that thus "a lowered risk of penile cancer is observed in circumcised men." It is important to remember when looking at the studies performed in the 1950s, that the octogenarians afflicted with penile cancer were born in the 1870s, when the circumcision rate in the United States was close to zero; the majority of men in that generation who were afflicted with cancer would be intact. The increased number of cases of penile cancer found in more recent studies is reflective of the steadily increasing circumcision rates in this country (37% of Maden's cases were circumcised). Using Maden's numbers and properly adjusting his control population to match the case population for age, there was no difference in risk of developing penile cancer between men who were circumcised and those who were not. HPV (the cause of genital warts) has been found in most cases of penile cancer. Genital warts are now more common in [[circumcised ]] men <ref name="cook1994">{{REFjournal

}}</ref><ref name="cook1993"/> and HPV lesions are equally common in [[circumcised ]] and [[intact ]] men.<ref name="Aynaud etal 1994"/> As the number of circumcised men approaching the age at which penile cancer becomes evident (70s and 80s) it is quite likely that the vast majority of men developing penile cancer in the United States will be circumcised.

Reddy et al. (1975) examined the frequency of carcinoma of the penis from 32 hospitals in India and found a wide variation in incidence that could not be explained by the [[intact ]] status of the Hindus or the circumcision practices of the Muslims. <ref name="reddy1975">{{REFjournal

}}</ref> Finally, circumcision does not explain why Japan and [[Denmark]] have lower penile cancer rates than the [[United States ]] when circumcision, especially infant circumcision, is not common in those two countries.<ref name="kochen1980">{{REFjournal

In "[[Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy]]," [[Edward Wallerstein]] writes: ''"If infant circumcision reduces penile cancer we could expect to see proportionately less penile cancer in circumcising nations as compared to noncircumcising ones. No such difference is found."'' Wallerstein reports that, for various years between 1966 and 1972, the annual rate of new cases of penile cancer was 0.8 for the [[United States ]] (where circumcision rates are high), and 0.5 for [[Finland]], 0.9 for [[Denmark]] and 1.1 for both [[Norway ]] and [[Sweden ]] (all of where circumcision rates are low). None of these differences is statistically significant.<ref>{{WallersteinE 1980}}</ref> Further, within the same time frame, both France and the [[United States ]] had the same rate, 0.3, of deaths due to penile cancer.<ref>{{REFjournal