If you haven't read the blogs breaking down all of the benefits, read those before you read/comment on this. (Well unless you are just in it for the cliffs notes.)
After a careful review of all of the medical benefits, the case for circumcision is rather poor. There isn't clear evidence than circumcision significantly impacts any of the disorders that it is supposed to treat for. Also, the odds that a male gets any of these disorders is less than 1% - 2%.
Oddly enough the rate of complication tends to be quoted between 1-3%, depending on what you count as a complication. Some people who quote extreme pain and other stress placed on the newborn place the complication rate at 50-75%. Either way, circumcising for medical benefit doesn't seem medically valid.
The most convincing benefit seems to be the prevention of AIDS. I broke this down earlier to show that the benefit was minimal at best, and non-existent at worst, but let's just assume that the studies are 100% accurate. Your newborn isn't going to get AIDS through sex. If your reason to circumcise is for your baby not to get AIDS, than he can make that decision for himself. If he is old enough to consent to sex, he can consent to a circumcision.
The main point, is circumcision for medicine is silly. It really doesn't make sense when you break down all the proposed benefits, and plot out what really happens. I hate to tell all of the mothers this, but the circumcision performed on your son doesn't do him any more good than the procedure used to remove his tonsils. The only three things I can see where circumcision is justified is frostbite, gangrene, and cancer.
No comments:
Post a Comment