15,624
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→USA: Add text.
|accessdate=2020-08-03
}}
* {{REFweb
|url=http://www.academia.edu/15617255/The_AAP_report_on_circumcision_Bad_science_bad_ethics_bad_medicine
|archived=
|title=The AAP report on circumcision: bad science + bad ethics = bad medicine
|trans-title=
|language=
|last=Earp
|first=Brian
|author-link=
|publisher=University of Oxford
|website=www.academia.edu
|date=2013-05-27
|accessdate=2020-08-03
|format=PDF
|quote=Some readers will be unaware that the AAP is not a dispassionate scientific research body , but rather a trade association for pediatricians. Those among its members and stakeholders who perform NTCs stand to profit from the procedure, to the collective annual tune of $1.25 billion according to one (albeit notimpartial) estimate. Given the yawning potential for a financial conflict of interest, then, there needs to be a very strong, independent medical case for circumcision; and the AAP had better be able to show that it is both the safest and most cost effective means of promoting infant health. Both of these propositions fail,however, as I will continue to show in what follows.
}}
* {{REFjournal
|last=Blank