Circumcision industry

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Circumcision industry is the term used to identify the collection of American medical trade associations, state medical societies, hospitals, physicians, and medical journals that promote medically unnecessary, non-therapeutic male circumcision in the United States, and who financially profit from the performance thereof.

Medical trade associations

The medical trade associations are primarily the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American Urological Association.

Medical trade associations whose members profit from the performance of circumcision usually issue biased statements to promote non-therapeutic male circumcision.

State medical societies

State medical societies work behind the scenes within their own state to remove any impediments to the practice of medically unnecessary, non-therapeutic circumcision and to maintain third-party payment insurance coverage.


Non-therapeutic circumcision of the newborn is regarded as a profit center, therefore most maternity hospitals promote and profit from the practice of medically unnecessary, non-therapeutic circumcision, by allowing and encouraging its practice, by automatically providing a circumcision consent form in the package of forms provided to an expectant mother in labor on admission, and by directing nurses to repeatedly inquire of mothers if a circumcision is desired.[1]

Mansfield et al. (1995) studied the use of medical resources related to non-therapeutic infant circumcision. They discovered that mother and baby remain in hospital an average of one-fourth of a day longer when the newborn boy is to be circumcised.[2] During this time, all room and other charges increase, so a circumcision is a real windfall for the hospital. Not only does the hospital collect a facility fee for the circumcision set up, it also gets to collect additional room and other charges.

Hospitals are also believed to sell the tissue from the excised infant foreskins to the bioengineering and cosmetics industries for a substantial profit.[3] [4]


The physicians are primarily those who practice in the areas of general practice, obstetrics, pediatrics, or urology and who financially benefit from the performance of the painful and traumatic non-therapeutic amputation.

Urologists focus on adolescent and adult intact males who escaped circumcision of the newborn.

Medical journals

Medical journals are mostly those journals which focus on obstetrics, pediatrics, family practice, or urology and publish biased articles to promote the practice.[5] and to secure third-party payment insurance coverage of the medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic surgery.


Professor Morgan (1967), in his classic article — Penile plunder — accurately described the only real reason for the performance of non-therapeutic circumcision as — chronic remunerative surgery — meaning long-lasting recurring compensation to the surgeon.[6]

The profits are amazingly large. Bollinger (2012) estimated annual intake from the performance of medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic circumcision to be $3,640,000,000.[7]

See also

External links


  1. REFweb Chapin, Georganne (18 November 2019). Having a Baby Boy? Intact America Warns, ‘Get Ready for the Circumcision Sellers!', prweb, Intact America. Retrieved 12 November 2023.
    Quote: Each year, an estimated 1.4 million baby boys are circumcised in American medical settings. Intact America estimates that if circumcision solicitations were to cease, 600,000 boys—and the men they will become—would be spared every year from the trauma and lifelong consequences of the procedure.
  2. REFjournal Mansfield CJ, Hueston WJ, Rudy M. Neonatal circumcision: associated factors and length of hospital stay. J Fam Pract. October 1995; 41: [4]: 370-6. PMID. Retrieved 14 November 2023.
  3. REFweb Anonymous (2023). Uncovering the Truth: Are Foreskins Really Used in Cosmetics? [The Shocking Story and Essential Information You Need to Know], Retrieved 14 November 2023.
  4. REFweb Anonymous (2023). The foreskin industry, Retrieved 14 November 2023.
  5. REFbook Fleiss PM (1999): An Analysis of Bias Regarding Circumcision in American Medical Literature. Work: Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Considerations in Pediatric Practice. Denniston, George C., Hodges, Frederick Mansfield, Milos, Marilyn (ed.). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Pp. 379-401. ISBN 0-306-46131-5. Retrieved 12 November 2023.
  6. REFjournal Morgan WKC. Penile plunder. Med J Aust. 27 May 1967; 1(21): 1102-3. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 15 November 2023.
  7. REFweb Bollinger, Dan (2012). High Cost of Circumcision: $3.6 Billion Annually,, Academia. Retrieved 12 November 2023.
    Quote: As the saying goes, follow the money. Now you know why neither the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, or the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists haven’t condemned this unnecessary surgery, and why their physician members are quick to recommend the procedure to expectant parents.