20,862
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Add text and citation.
|accessdate=2025-01-03
}}</ref> These findings are not surprising since the human [[foreskin]] provides both [[Immunological and protective function of the foreskin| protective and immunological functions]] against both physical [[trauma]] and [[infection]]. Obviously, [[circumcised]] boys lack these protections.
Bollinger (2025) enumerated the harms and injuries caused by medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic [[circumcision of the newborn]] and its inherent violation of [[human rights]] and degradation of health and well-being.<ref name="bollinger2025-08-27">{{REFdocument
|title=Policy Paper: Newborn Circumcision as a Negative Wellness Factor
|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394517060_Policy_Paper_Newborn_Circumcision_as_a_Negative_Wellness_Factor
|contribution=
|last=Bollinger
|first=Dan
|publisher=Research Gate
|format=PDF
|date=2025-08
|accessdate=2025-08-29
}}</ref>
Circumcision was popularized in English-speaking nations in the nineteenth century. The practice of non-therapeutic circumcision of boys now has greatly declined in [[Australia]], [[Canada]], [[New Zealand]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. It has been gradually declining since 1980 in the [[United States]]. It has ''never'' been a popular practice in other western nations. Circumcision of boys is not done in the Russian Federation, Latin America, or [[China]]. In [[India]] only the minority Muslim population does circumcision of children. In Europe it is only done for religious reasons by Muslims and Jews.