Circumcision instrument
There are three types of Circumcision instruments in common use that make it easier and relatively safer for medical doctors to profit by carrying out medically unnecessary, non-therapeutic harmful infant circumcision.[1] Infant circumcision is almost always carried out by the use of a circumcision device or clamp. They are useful because they reduce the risk of bleeding.
The most common devices are the Gomco clamp, the Plastibell device, and the Mogen clamp, however none of them are really safe and serious injury or even death can occur with any of them.[2]
The Gomco clamp is the oldest design and remains the most popular. It was introduced in the early 1930s. The Gomco clamp suppresses bleeding by crushing of the foreskin and the blood vessels within, after which the foreskin may be excised with a scapel. Pain is plentiful.
The Plastibell was introduced in the early 1950s. The Plastibell suppresses bleeding by the use of a string tied tightly around the foreskin to crush the foreskin and its blood vessels against the Plastibell. The foreskin and the Plastibell is then allowed to die and fall off after several days. The Plastibell may cause urine retention and its risks, including death.
The Mogen clamp was introduced in 1954 and is the newest of the three instruments. It was invented by a rabbi and is based on the design of the traditional Jewish barzell, so it may be favored by mohellim for the performance of ritual circumcision. The Mogen instrument claims to protect the glans penis during circumcision, however, in actual practice it has been possible to slice off part of the glans penis. There have been some very substantial awards for damages that have caused the company to go into bankruptcy and suspend production of the Mogen clamp.
Change in medical view
One should note that these circumcision instruments were all developed more than seventy years ago and are relics of the last century. At that time medical opinion favored infant circumcision, which was then alleged to prevent various diseases.
Medical opinion has shifted dramatically since then. Circumcision is no longer viewed as an effective preventer of disease. Instead, circumcision of male minors is now viewed as a harmful, unnecessary, unethical, violation of the patient's human rights, and genital mutilation, which causes a loss of functional penile tissue and irreversible loss of protective, immunological, sexual, and sensory functions. Medical science now knows that circumcised boys have three times more penile issues than foreskinned boys.[3]
Not a single medical authority anywhere now recommends non-therapeutic circumcision of infant boys. The practice of circumcision of male infants is now declining everywhere that it has been practiced, so it is unlikely that new circumcision instruments will be developed.
See also
References
- ↑
Garrett, Connor (21 December 2023). The Economics of Circumcision: A Full Breakdown of This Penis Business
, Intact America. Retrieved 23 April 2025. - ↑ Milos MF (14 March 2022).
Ask Marilyn – Circumcision: No Surgical Device Is Safe
, Intact America. Retrieved 24 October 2024. - ↑
Fendereski K, Horns JJ, Driggs N, Lau G, Shaeffer AJ. Comparing Penile Problems in Circumcised vs. Uncircumcised Boys: Insights From a Large Commercial Claims Database With a Focus on Provider Type Performing Circumcision. J Pediatr Surg. November 2024; 59(11): [161614]. PMID. PMC. DOI. Retrieved 23 April 2025.
