I can't believe the lack of accurate information from a doctor & children's hospital. This is absolutely shameful. A medical resource should be trusted to give real medical information & not cultural myths & misleading statistics that aren't even cited. Terrible.
If it's a "personal decision" then what right does a parent have to make it for his child? Doesn't every human deserve the basic right to bodily autonomy?
Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat. Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat. Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat. Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat. Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat. Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat. Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat. Human Rights mean nothing at AkronChildrens Repeat.
Forcibly amputating healthy normal sexual parts is wrong.
Not one national medical association on earth (not even Israel's) endorses routine circumcision. This includes the bodies who have revised their policies SINCE the research on HIV in Africa has been available.
Amputative non-therapeutic cosmetic surgery is NOT morally a parent's choice or a medical issue.
And she doesn't mention the main reason to JUST LEAVE A BABY'S PENIS ALONE - because it's HIS body, HIS choice, when he is old enough to make it, and he'll almost always choose to keep it all.
"Reduction of urinary tract infections" - from 1/100 to 1/1000 by the advocates' own figures, meaning 991/1000 circumcisions are wasted to prevent one infection, which can be treated when and if it occurs (as it is in girls, who get more of them).
"penile cancer"? It would take THOUSANDS of circumcisions to prevent one - if that.
This is pathetic. Risks are "bleeding..." A baby's body can only afford to lose 2 tablespoons of blood before he's in danger, and there is a tiny artery that can easily be cut in circumcision. Disposable diapers can easily hide that much blood. "...and infection" Including MRSA and others that can be fatal.
Ask yourself this; What man would get himself circumcised? I know I sure wouldn't. In America, only 1 out of 5,000 men choose circumcision for themselves, who were kept intact by their parents. What does that tell you? In most of the world, circumcision is rare or non-existent. It is largely practiced by Muslims and Jews, and religion is no excuse for torture and genital mutilation. Even some Jews and Muslims are saying NO to forced amputation of the genitals.
Anesthetic is not used on the majority of babies. Babies SCREAM when circumcised. Even those who receive anesthesia experience pain and extreme discomfort. Baby boys are strapped down into something called a "Circumstraint". It's something from a horror movie.
An intact (not circumcised) penis is easier to care for. You just wipe like a finger to clean. The foreskin is fused to the glans - there is no way for anything to get under it! If intact, don't retract! A circumcised penis has a raw wound for up to one month, during that time the baby sits in urine and feces. A circumcised baby has an increased chance of infection due to this. The circumcision itself is very risky. An estimated 200 babies die every year from circumcision complications.
First of all, the male prepuce (foreskin) is not "extra skin." Every normal boy on the planet is born with a foreskin. Second, religion can no longer be used as an excuse for torture and genital mutilation of children - circumcision is both. Third, most American boys are no longer circumcised (only 32% in 2009.)
Urinary tract infections are much more common in females, yet we are not cutting the genitals of girls. Penile cancer is rare, less common than male breast cancer!
Circumcision removes the most sensitive part of a man's penis. The five most sensitive areas of the penis are on the foreskin. The transitional region from the external to the internal foreskin is the most sensitive region of the fully intact penis, and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis.
----------------------------
Fine-Touch Pressure Thresholds In The Adult Penis
Amputating healthy body parts is most definitely a personal decision. This decision should be left up to the owner of said parts--no one else. All individuals, regardless of gender, have a human right to genital integrity.
Why don't people circumcise? This hack of a doctor says "oh, they're too afraid."
...how about THIS little un-mentioned reason: NO NATIONAL MEDICAL ORGANIZATION IN THE ENTIRE WORLD RECOMMENDS IT.
The foreskin has thousands upon thousands of highly-specialized fine-touch nerve endings like those in the fingertips and lips. It also provides sexual and protective functionality.
Melissa Houser is either grossly misinformed or deliberately misleading. Neither reflects well on her. POOR video.
It's seriously worries me that doctors mislead parents in thinking they will have to pull their infants foreskin back for it to be cleaned!
It's absolutely disturbing because surely there will be complications because of this misinformation. Most of which will likely lead to infection and bleeding.
The prepuce is fused to the head of the glans and should NOT be pulled back for cleaning when the child is an infant.
Please be responsible and provide accurate information.
Intact is ACCURATE and correct. The majority of men are happy with their PrePuces and they provide EVIDENCE for the "-" claim that "leaving the PrePuce alone" is accurate and correct in the FIRST place.
The "+" claim, that removal of the PrePuce be accurate and correct, is the one claim with the burden of proof.
I assume that every Doctor knows, that the real reason for the removal of healthy, erogenous tissue is, that it will be used as a pleasurable tool, by the rightful owner.
The whole discussion about benefits is premature if done prior to considering the rights of the child to his whole body as a grown man. Period. QED. End of argument.
You don't believe me? What about routine mastectomy for baby girls? THAT would prevent over 40,000 female deaths in the US alone EVERY YEAR. The benefit would be HUGE. And yet, it is not done because we believe females have the right to their whole body. The rights of the individual are paramount.
if this women is a doctor she is a bad one. in infants you do NOT retract the foreskin. the foreskin is fused to the glans and will retract on its own over time. penal cancer rates are 1 in 100,000! the rate is the same in intact and circumcised men. pain management is rare for infant circumcision less than 1 out of 3 babies get any kind of pan control. circumcision is a violation of medical ethics. you can't do cosmetic surgery on an infant. parental assent can only be used for life or death
I can't believe the lack of accurate information from a doctor & children's hospital. This is absolutely shameful. A medical resource should be trusted to give real medical information & not cultural myths & misleading statistics that aren't even cited. Terrible.
ReallyWWWThinking 1 month ago
If it's a "personal decision" then what right does a parent have to make it for his child? Doesn't every human deserve the basic right to bodily autonomy?
Mystoksor 2 months ago 2
TLCTugger 3 months ago 5
Hey! LADY! You forgot something.
Forcibly amputating healthy normal sexual parts is wrong.
Not one national medical association on earth (not even Israel's) endorses routine circumcision. This includes the bodies who have revised their policies SINCE the research on HIV in Africa has been available.
Amputative non-therapeutic cosmetic surgery is NOT morally a parent's choice or a medical issue.
TLCTugger 3 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Foreskin feels REALLY good.
HIS body, his decision.
TLCTugger 3 months ago
@TLCTugger I beat you to it!
7777Hugh 2 months ago
And she doesn't mention the main reason to JUST LEAVE A BABY'S PENIS ALONE - because it's HIS body, HIS choice, when he is old enough to make it, and he'll almost always choose to keep it all.
Hugh7777 3 months ago
2:50: "Be quick! This offer won't last!"
Hugh7777 3 months ago
"Reduction of urinary tract infections" - from 1/100 to 1/1000 by the advocates' own figures, meaning 991/1000 circumcisions are wasted to prevent one infection, which can be treated when and if it occurs (as it is in girls, who get more of them).
"penile cancer"? It would take THOUSANDS of circumcisions to prevent one - if that.
Hugh7777 3 months ago
This is pathetic. Risks are "bleeding..." A baby's body can only afford to lose 2 tablespoons of blood before he's in danger, and there is a tiny artery that can easily be cut in circumcision. Disposable diapers can easily hide that much blood. "...and infection" Including MRSA and others that can be fatal.
Hugh7777 3 months ago
Ask yourself this; What man would get himself circumcised? I know I sure wouldn't. In America, only 1 out of 5,000 men choose circumcision for themselves, who were kept intact by their parents. What does that tell you? In most of the world, circumcision is rare or non-existent. It is largely practiced by Muslims and Jews, and religion is no excuse for torture and genital mutilation. Even some Jews and Muslims are saying NO to forced amputation of the genitals.
Chadolution 3 months ago 5
Anesthetic is not used on the majority of babies. Babies SCREAM when circumcised. Even those who receive anesthesia experience pain and extreme discomfort. Baby boys are strapped down into something called a "Circumstraint". It's something from a horror movie.
Chadolution 3 months ago
An intact (not circumcised) penis is easier to care for. You just wipe like a finger to clean. The foreskin is fused to the glans - there is no way for anything to get under it! If intact, don't retract! A circumcised penis has a raw wound for up to one month, during that time the baby sits in urine and feces. A circumcised baby has an increased chance of infection due to this. The circumcision itself is very risky. An estimated 200 babies die every year from circumcision complications.
Chadolution 3 months ago
@Chadolution The foreskin isn't fused to the glans, you're a liar and an idiot. 99% of boys can retract their foreskins by age 14.
MidMASS2 1 month ago
First of all, the male prepuce (foreskin) is not "extra skin." Every normal boy on the planet is born with a foreskin. Second, religion can no longer be used as an excuse for torture and genital mutilation of children - circumcision is both. Third, most American boys are no longer circumcised (only 32% in 2009.)
Urinary tract infections are much more common in females, yet we are not cutting the genitals of girls. Penile cancer is rare, less common than male breast cancer!
Chadolution 3 months ago 2
Where's TLCtugger we need his post!
artguy149 3 months ago
@artguy149 I'll stand in for him.
Foreskin feels REALLY good.
HIS body, HIS choice.
Hugh7777 3 months ago 4
Circumcision removes the most sensitive part of a man's penis. The five most sensitive areas of the penis are on the foreskin. The transitional region from the external to the internal foreskin is the most sensitive region of the fully intact penis, and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis.
----------------------------
Fine-Touch Pressure Thresholds In The Adult Penis
British Journal of Urology International,
2007, Vol. 99, No. 4, 864-869
Sorrells et al.
freedom0speech 3 months ago 6
Amputating healthy body parts is most definitely a personal decision. This decision should be left up to the owner of said parts--no one else. All individuals, regardless of gender, have a human right to genital integrity.
MelancholyLogic 3 months ago 2
Why don't people circumcise? This hack of a doctor says "oh, they're too afraid."
...how about THIS little un-mentioned reason: NO NATIONAL MEDICAL ORGANIZATION IN THE ENTIRE WORLD RECOMMENDS IT.
The foreskin has thousands upon thousands of highly-specialized fine-touch nerve endings like those in the fingertips and lips. It also provides sexual and protective functionality.
Melissa Houser is either grossly misinformed or deliberately misleading. Neither reflects well on her. POOR video.
joelface 3 months ago 7
It's seriously worries me that doctors mislead parents in thinking they will have to pull their infants foreskin back for it to be cleaned!
It's absolutely disturbing because surely there will be complications because of this misinformation. Most of which will likely lead to infection and bleeding.
The prepuce is fused to the head of the glans and should NOT be pulled back for cleaning when the child is an infant.
Please be responsible and provide accurate information.
TheChallenger2011 3 months ago 3
Please don' t participate in cutting healthy children.
Gender discrimination is unethical.
The male gender, infant boys more specifically deserve more dignity than this.
TheChallenger2011 3 months ago 4
Intact is ACCURATE and correct. The majority of men are happy with their PrePuces and they provide EVIDENCE for the "-" claim that "leaving the PrePuce alone" is accurate and correct in the FIRST place.
The "+" claim, that removal of the PrePuce be accurate and correct, is the one claim with the burden of proof.
I assume that every Doctor knows, that the real reason for the removal of healthy, erogenous tissue is, that it will be used as a pleasurable tool, by the rightful owner.
kleenex3000 3 months ago 2
The whole discussion about benefits is premature if done prior to considering the rights of the child to his whole body as a grown man. Period. QED. End of argument.
You don't believe me? What about routine mastectomy for baby girls? THAT would prevent over 40,000 female deaths in the US alone EVERY YEAR. The benefit would be HUGE. And yet, it is not done because we believe females have the right to their whole body. The rights of the individual are paramount.
lochinvar00465 3 months ago 2
if this women is a doctor she is a bad one. in infants you do NOT retract the foreskin. the foreskin is fused to the glans and will retract on its own over time. penal cancer rates are 1 in 100,000! the rate is the same in intact and circumcised men. pain management is rare for infant circumcision less than 1 out of 3 babies get any kind of pan control. circumcision is a violation of medical ethics. you can't do cosmetic surgery on an infant. parental assent can only be used for life or death
madbr3991 3 months ago 2