Nordic countries may finally ban circumcision.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

So...you want the right to review and over-rule other people's medical decisions? That seems weird to me.

Personally, I'm uncomfortable with medical decisions being made by courts and legislatures instead of doctors and their patients.

Actually, I was thinking of the AAP with their new, mixed conclusion. There are some benefits, but not enough to be recommended, and social and cultural reasons should guide the parents.

 

[Wildy]

Okay, they did follow up. The original reported figures were after a 3-month reporting period.

However, that still doesn't address the flaws of self-reporting, high dropout rate, and failure to account for substantial changes in high-risk sexual activity among the test group. Independent evaluation found a dramatic reduction in high-risk sexual activity and increase in condom use of the test group vs. the control group. There was also a substantial drop-out rate among the test subjects who reported no change in sexual activity after circumcision. On top of that, independent evaluation found a reporting problem with one of the population studies that resulted in it being dropped; said population did not demonstrate the dramatic drop in AIDS rates. There were a couple threads on this board that cropped up after the study was published, which dealt with the various flaws in the study in detail. The drop in AIDs rates is better attributed to improvements in sex education, resulting in a reduction in high-risk sexual activity and increased condom use.

Beyond the fact that you cite no sources, it appears that many of the claims you make are specifically contradicted by the follow on report.

Are you guys sure that you're talking about the same study? "The African study" is a pretty useless phrase since most, if not all, of the studies showing a benefit in circumcision were done in Africa.

From what luchog is saying, I'm wondering if that's a reference to a Ugandan study where the circumcised group also received something of a sex education while the control group didn't.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

The scholarly papers you are missing are linked in the above post.

Er, I'm not sure what I am supposed to be getting. Did you read all of them? One says there is a benefit for X, and then another says the benefit isn't backed up, or only applies to high risk groups, or there is publication bias, etc. I can cherry pick cherry picks .

I don't recall your asking what my medical professional based his recommendation on. I recall that he specifically mentioned reduced risk of penile cancer and reduced risk of STD's. Thanks for asking!

I don't know what is with this weird vibe, 'cause I had to ask you numerous times just to get the vague, one word answer of "prophylactic".

Anyway, like I said before, finding some benefits doesn't make something recommended or justifiable. The positive AAP conclusion even held back on that. For example:

A review of the current literature was conducted using PubMed and current practices from guidelines of major professional societies. Physicians should consider the various ethical concerns and provide the patient's guardians with unbiased counsel. There is a lack of evidence both in favor of and against recommending routine neonatal circumcisions in the United States. The question remains whether we should continue unwarranted male circumcisions, especially when the major tenet of medical ethics is "do no harm".

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23342820

 

[catsmate]

I think it's instructive to note that whenever civic discussions to repeal those laws occur, spikes in antisemitic incidents usually follow.

Evidence for this claim please.

Somewhat, yes. I would say the same for most of the continent. I suspect, however, that anti-Muslim sentiment is the main driving force behind this circumcision ban proposition, though. A lot of very influential Europeans hate the **** out of some Muslims.

Evidence for this claim, or just another factually unsupported opinion?

I'm saying that that antisemitism is the reason that Jewish ritual slaughter, out of all cruel practices, was singled out for a ban, yes.

Evidence for this claim please.

So where's the line on how much parents can mutilate their children?

I'd be interested to know this too; is ritual scarification OK? Or starving them?

The debate is not about slaughtering animals but circumcision in male humans.

Then perhaps you could stick to the subject.

So where's the evidence that a penile prepupectomy performed in infancy is mutilation?

Mutilate; To disfigure by damaging irreparably, to make imperfect by excising or altering parts.

Please go away.

S/he/it is engaged in puerile trolling. If you wish use the Ignore function, click on the username and select the 'Add this User to your Ignore list' option.

Our pediatrician recommended circumcision for prophylactic (no pun intended) medical reasons.

Prophylaxis against what? No pediatric medical organisation recommends routine circumcision and only the AAP doesn't oppose it.

No. this was in fact part of the early counseling sessions before the kid was born. Hell, before we knew if it was a boy or girl.

It's almost as if circumcision opponents are unaware of the meta-analytic data that documents the non-HIV-releated medical benefits of circumcision across the basic research,

Or perhaps we are aware of it and know that's it's flawed and inconclusive.

There is no convincing evidence that circumcision is useful or necessary in terms of prevention or hygiene.
Partly in the light of the complications which can arise during or after circumcision, circumcision is not
justifiable except on medical/therapeutic grounds. Insofar as there are medical benefits, such as a possibly
reduced risk of HIV infection, it is reasonable to put off circumcision until the age at which such a risk is
relevant and the boy himself can decide about the intervention, or can opt for any available alternatives

or, if they are aware of it, they are making a judgement call that they don't consider the benefits to outweigh the risks and want the government to make the same call mandatory for everyone living in the their country.

More strawmannery.

 

[The Fool]

Arbitrary? Hardly.

So much of the anti-circumcision argument depends on framing.

Not sure what you are proposing. Are you saying that it is acceptable or not depending on what bit they want to remove? The sex of the child? What rules would you be ok with?

 

[catsmate]

I'm happy to own up to having no respect for minority religious rights where they affect other people.

Agreed.

I have to say, it is highly amusing watching the circumcision lobby go through their incredible tortured mental gymnastics to somehow separate chopping a bit off the end of your old boy from any other form of mutilation (and boy don't you hate that word). And mutilation is the correct word - if we chopped peoples earlobes off (for religious or traditional reasons) that would have arguably even less practical impact on their on-going life (assuming the practice was widespread) than circumcision but it would still be mutilation.

They're mysteriously less supportive of breast ironing, ritual scarification as practiced in Ethiopia, infibulation, mutilation as punishment under Sharia law et cetera.

As I said very early in this thread, the reason the debate got started recently in Norway is because a baby boy died after his circumcision.

Unfortunately it often needs a child dying because of this mutilation to instigate debate.
Of course there's less interest in the Xhosa ulwaluko which saw sixty boys die this year alone.

It's a fair cop. The baby did apparently die as a result of complications from the procedure. However, there seems to be some question as to whether the complications might not have arisen due to physician negligence (indeed, the professionals responsible have had their practice suspended and are facing conduct review). Seems quite possible given that doctors in Norway don't typically have much experience with proper circumcision protocol, and perhaps since so many Norwegian physicians disapprove of the procedure, when it is performed it is often done with insufficent medical oversight.

Of course had the mutilation not been performed.......

By way of comparison, I note that the CDC puts American infant circumcision rates of "mild" complications at 0.2%, and "severe" rates at approximately 0%. It is an extremely low-risk procedure when properly done.

I'm aware of the CDC stats, I'm also aware of the lack of proper studies to support them.

Er, you'll pardon me if I decline to take your word for all that.

Feel free to examine and cite the research then.

I also thought so until I learned about Gilgal Society (among others). It's a pro-circumcision advocacy group with members sharing a sado-masochistic fetish of circumcision, that is they get sexually aroused by fantasizing, watching, or performing circumcisions. The group has also published erotic literature about circumcising minors. Interestingly some of the members also happen to be medical professionals who not only perform circumcisions but also advocate circumcision to the point of making it mandatory, and also produce studies which purpotedly show significant health benefits for circumcision such as reducing AIDS. Last year Vernon Quaintance, the Head of Gilgal society, was convicted of possession of child porn.

Oh **** yes. They're a group of dangerous degenerates. There are a disturbing number of authors of pro-circumcision paper (Baily, Auvert, Schoen, Morris, et al) who are members of that society, the Acorn Society and the 'Cutting Club'.

 

[Ethan Thane Athen]

Are you from the UK? They actually have the healthiest teeth in the world.

Yes, the UK. Nice to know the continued attempts to privatise dentistry haven't ruined our teeth.

I was referring, in a tongue in cheek fashion, to the usual cliché that Americans have whiter, straighter teeth than Brits (the Hollywood smile) rather than actual dental health though.

Certainly an obsession with 'perfect teeth' seemed more an American than a British thing but, as with many such things, I think we were simply lagging behind as there's been a bit of a sea-change here in just one generation - when I was a nipper you were an object of ridicule if you wore a brace (metal mouth, robo-jaws etc) but now kids actively desire them - bizarre! Also seem to be used for rather minor correction that would simply have been left 'in my day'. [/derail - and it is a derail, correcting crooked teeth as a teenager is an analogy to circumcision like having a haircut is an analogy to being scalped].

 

[gumboot]

b) unlike most of the rest of the civilised world, Americans apparently struggle to keep their wangs clean

The idea that the inside of the foreskin and the glans of the penis needs "cleaning" is a myth, presumably invented to justify circumcision.

 

[Belgian thought]

The rest of the folk doing circumcision practice modern medicine not 6th Century.

Not all - http://abcnews.go.com/Health/baby-d...l-circumcision-nyc-orthodox/story?id=15888618

 

[Ethan Thane Athen]

The idea that the inside of the foreskin and the glans of the penis needs "cleaning" is a myth, presumably invented to justify circumcision.

It wasn't the most serious comment I've ever made on this forum but that was sort of the point I was making...

But cheers anyway.

 

[gumboot]

It wasn't the most serious comment I've ever made on this forum but that was sort of the point I was making...

But cheers anyway.

Oh, I was agreeing with you.

 

[Ethan Thane Athen]

Oh, I was agreeing with you.

Tidy!

 

[Ryokan]

The rest of the folk doing circumcision practice modern medicine not 6th Century.

The boy in case was circumcised by a medical doctor. That's a requirement for circumcision in Norway.

I'm starting to suspect you don't like Muslims, which is creating this strange cognitive dissonance in you. Circumcision is a good thing, except if those dirty Muslims do it. Maybe you should sit down and think this through.

 

[Craig B]

The boy in case was circumcised by a medical doctor. That's a requirement for circumcision in Norway.

I'm starting to suspect you don't like Muslims, which is creating this strange cognitive dissonance in you. Circumcision is a good thing, except if those dirty Muslims do it. Maybe you should sit down and think this through.

Regrettably I think you're right. In an earlier post ABC 10 wrote

... the Nordics are very susceptible to pressure from the Muslim lobby who also circumcise males and sometimes females. The Nordics are so taken with Circumcising Muslims that they invited them into their country to live with interesting results.

These remarks lend some credence to your suspicion. However, the wording "the Nordics are so taken with Circumcising Muslims that they invited them into their country" might be taken to mean that the Nordics like to perform circumcision on Muslims and invited them into their country for the purpose of indulging this inclination. But perhaps not.

 

[colander]

The idea that the inside of the foreskin and the glans of the penis needs "cleaning" is a myth, presumably invented to justify circumcision.

Um, what? Semi-regular irrigation of the prepuce and environs is a handy way to ameliorate excess smegma build-up and helps greatly in the prevention of uncomfortable fungal infections.

 

[Rat]

Um, what? Semi-regular irrigation of the prepuce and environs is a handy way to ameliorate excess smegma build-up and helps greatly in the prevention of uncomfortable fungal infections.

Yes. The same is true of feet (eta: mutatis mutandis), and lots of other places. I'm assuming the implication of it is that we all wash, and it needs no special care.

 

[ABC10]

The boy in case was circumcised by a medical doctor. That's a requirement for circumcision in Norway.

I'm starting to suspect you don't like Muslims, which is creating this strange cognitive dissonance in you. Circumcision is a good thing, except if those dirty Muslims do it. Maybe you should sit down and think this through.

I don't like the Muslim treatment of women and girls as 4th class citizens or the little boy and girl pedophile so wide spread in Islam. Don't care too much about the boy's ding dongs either. Perhaps, the medical doctor was a Muslim practicing 6th Century medicine.

 

[Craig B]

I don't like the Muslim treatment of women and girls as 4th class citizens or the little boy and girl pedophile so wide spread in Islam. Don't care too much about the boy's ding dongs either. Perhaps, the medical doctor was a Muslim practicing 6th Century medicine.

I see. How many practitioners of 6th century medicine (Islam dates from the 7th century, by the way) do you think practice as qualified clinicians in Norway?

 

[rustypouch]

Not sure what you are proposing. Are you saying that it is acceptable or not depending on what bit they want to remove? The sex of the child? What rules would you be ok with?

Good luck getting a straight answer to that question.

 

[ABC10]

I see. How many practitioners of 6th century medicine (Islam dates from the 7th century, by the way) do you think practice as qualified clinicians in Norway?

OOPs, 7th Century life style and practice. I don't know, but at least one made a terrible mistake.