17,052
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Prophylactic reasons
Some people claim that circumcision has prophylactic benefits. Especially in the USA those arguments have persisted for more then a 100 years, with ever changing diseases circumcision is said to protect against. At first, these were diseases where [[masturbation]] was believed to be the cause. After bacteria and viruses had been discovered, arguments changed, and one after another miscellaneous diseases were cited.
* [[Phimosis]]: as mentioned earlier, true [[phimosis]] is rare and can be treated effectively without surgery. According to a study by Blalock et al. (2003)<refname="blalock2003">{{REFjournal
|last=Blalock
|init=HJ
|url=http://www.cirp.org/library/complications/blalock1/
|accessdate=2019-11-07
}}</ref>, 2.9% of those circumcised develop a post-operative [[phimosis]], in which the circumcision scar constricts. In [[intact ]] patients, the rate of [[phimosis]] is only 1% (see also the study by [[Jakob Øster]]). Therefore, circumcision is not a preventive measure for [[phimosis]].
* Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs): a vast number of studies has been conducted on the subject of transmission of STDs.
* First, it has to be noted that any form of protection against these diseases only affects people who are sexually active. Circumcision in childhood cannot be justified on these grounds, since any assumed protective effect will not occur before the boy is already old enough to decide about circumcision for himself.