@DOMSBRAT Sounds like you're looking for justification for forced genital cutting of children. You won't find it from Dean Edell. He has taken the ETHICAL stance that healthy children DO NOT NEED immediate reductive surgery to the genitals.
Dean Edell has spoken for many years on the most basic human right of ALL children to their birthright, the whole body they were born with.
Look elsewhere if you are looking for justification for sexual mutilation of children.
@Bonobo3D THE MOST BASIC RIGHT OF CHILDREN IS TO BE BORN AND NOT ABORTED! Please don't talk to me in absolutes when it comes to rights, because the talk of rights is null and void if the child has none because it's a nothing until it has the right from some human who will allow it to be born.
Our rights and the come from God not the state or another human being.
@DOMSBRAT Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Child, principals 9 and 10.
@Bonobo3D . I don't recognize the U.N. on anything, it's more than obvious you would. 2. If you have this fetish than keep it to yourself, I really don't wish to continue any further conversation with a childish person. 3. Your more worried about some piece of skin that is actually useless to men except for fetish, than you are about the innocent right to life. 4. Parents don't need more government telling then how to live. 5. Can you digest that without bothering me any more?
@DOMSBRAT No bother at all that's what I'm here for. And you are here and commenting of your own accord.
There really isn't any need for further laws to protect boys since forced circumcision by legal definition is BATTERY and ASSAULT.
Girls are expressly protected by law from any and all genital cutting, even a ritual nick will send parents and doctors to jail. Boys need the laws equalized and enforced to protect them and THEIR genitals as well.
Anyone else think that trying to censure the data coming from circumcision advocates, makes the intactivist viewpoint ring hollow?
Whether or not there are benefits, it's not the parents right to choose. It's our SONS bodies. Soo, In light of that, I don't think it's clever to simply refute evidence of benefit. We should be better than that.
@MrJewishWarrior I a one of the very few intactivists who doesn't blindly deny the medical benefits and actualy support parents who have religious convictions on this issue. I speak about people who do this as a matter of habit but without any thought. When a Jewish person chooses it, there is a conscience eement due to their covenant. That's not the same as just "my dad was so ill do it too".btw, I know I'm black, but my mouth isn't that big I don't go after jewish noses
@Bonobo3D Education begins with research. I'm not denying in the least that condoms & other methods of prevention work. They work. As for Africans being oppressed it's been going on for over 1000 years & it's hardly gotten better. But people doing solid research trying to slow the AIDS crisis in Africa should not get automatically dismissed as exploitative/colonialist. No one should be forced to undergo circumcision. But if a study shows circumcision helps the info should be shared.
@pjherron If circumcision worked then it would be easily replicated with another study. The study that is being touted is bogus, those who are insisting on it refuse to replicate it. That is junk science and medical fraud. The rush to accept circumcision is revealing about the unscrupulous motivations of the promoters.
@MrJewishWarrior LIves ruined by this abuse of children include countless deaths, penile abatements, gangrene, botched circumcisions, see the Global Survey of Circumcision Harm.
@MrJewishWarrior "you dumb Goyim know nothing on the benefits this surgery brings to society"
What are these benefits? Does the US (80% circumcised) have an obviously lower HIV and STD infection rate when compared to similar Western nations such as the UK or Germany with very low circumcisions? No. The US has a notably higher HIV rate and nearly identical STD rates.
Circumcision for disease prevention is a flop. The US mass circumcision experiment is the proof.
When it comes to Africa for the longest time I've thought that most of these current relief efforts are "fubar".
Think about it. Some times these organizations make adds which read something like this: "Last year you helped to save 20 000 lives. We need your help this year to save more."
I wonder how many of those saved ones are were the same who were saved the year before?
We need to get rid of the problem. Not just feed them. I say we should help them to help themselves.
I know this is the YouTube community and it is a long-shot but please, I have been mutilated and I will never know what it feels like to be a complete man again, I hate my parents so much for it.
Please donate to Foregen (dot) org
An organization dedicated to regenerating whatever is needed so people like me, and millions, will have the chance to be complete once again after being mutilated against our wills.
"This is not going to be a positive time in Western medical history" -- Well said, but still the understatement of the millenium. To even think where we could be if actual compassion and a real interest in human-rights issues and proper science led our way is just shocking. To witness all that misled and misleading nonsense rule instead is embarassing. Also, I'm concerned that the millions of men who are being mutilated will only remember that it was done by Western people. There will be blood.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"I can tell ya somethin'" & frowning & use of loaded rhetorical terms like "silly" & then citing unnamed studies is the very epitome of unsound and misleading information. Even more fascinating is Dr. Edell's curious employment of postcolonialism rhetoric.
The UN study claims not a prevention of AIDS but a reduction of AIDS across a population. AIDS is a terrible horrible plague in Africa and it's hardly colonialist for people around the world--not just people in the West--to want to help.
@pjherron People around the world can help end AIDS in Africa and every place with EDUCATION and proven methods of prevention, like CONDOMS. Genital cutting, forced or coerced upon people as we are seeing in African countries, is a medical fraud. There is much to this discussion that cannot be presented in one video.
Behind the "indicative medical reasons" we can find a lot of sick brains who starve to mutilate kids penis and pharmaceutical mafia. Dear babykillers, keep your brutality for your own babies and kids. Do not spread your lies any more for no one other. The little boy have a personal religious reason for this? Indeed? Better dead than intact? Bye sicko!
I find myself feeling enraged, depressed, and finally exhausted by the sheer ignorance of my society. What was taken from me goes far beyond a healthy piece of sexual tissue (as if that isn't enough to cause protest). My choice to identify with MY body in what way seems best to me was taken along with much of my sexual confidence, and after all the confusion of emotions after years of therapy I am simply exhausted. You cannot cure the ignorance of others, because that is their choice. Ironic...
Do people even realize that these scientists that perform these tests in Africa are actually affiliated with doctors and will lie and make up numbers to suit them. There is only one motive for doctors to continue circumcision and that is big money. In the past doctors used to say that having foreskin caused epilepsy, curvature of the spine, hallucinations and other absurd reasons and they are continuing to lie to people today as well.
@TheYellowtulip That lie is used to brainwash the uneducated people like in africa. Pro-circ can't spread that lie to more educated countries like europe and most regions in the world were intact males are dominant.
Circumcised men are more likely to get std's and aids because they are less sensitive so they feel less in condoms so they don't bother to use them and they bang as hard as a jackhammer to feel something causing tears on the penis head and In the delicate tissue of the vagina which causes bleeding.
Circumcision is a conspiracy in order for drug companies to make money on antivirals. I have seen more cut men than uncut men with herpes blisters on their penis and promised myself never to date cut men again.
"Circumcision status was not associated with HIV/HSV-2 infection nor increased high risk sexual behaviors. In males, preference for being or becoming circumcised was associated with inconsistent condom use and increased lifetime number of sexual partners." (1)
(1)Matthew Westercamp1,Male Circumcision in the General Population of Kisumu, Kenya: Beliefs about Protection, Risk Behaviors, HIV, and STIs
HEY EVERYBODY; LET ME TELL YOU A SECRET; IT'S A HOAX. It comes from the same source that snuffs out all other pleasures from the humankind by hoax. Judge them based on their current behavior, all over the world. Search for this youtube vid ---> Kosher Horror <---. Don't be a victim
What you're saying is just simple logic that some people can't grasp. Put the idea into people's heads that circumcision = immunity from STDs, and many young boys and foolish men will think they have a license to have unprotected sex.Spreading myths like this is dangerous indeed.
So riddle me this Batman, why do you feel the need to do an ad hoc ecological study (in your Bat-Brain = rhymes) that compares the etiology of HIV in countries with divergent at risk populations? You do know that ecological studies are only used to identify trends, not to attribute causality, right?
I am filled with endless rage and hatred to think that I was fucking betrayed by the medical system, the legal system and my family. I was mutilated when I was too young to defend myself. I have a horrible sex life in which I cant orgasm while using condoms and society wants me to play nice!?!? I don't know how to calm the fires in my heart. Every apathetic human I see is just a walking mound of unworthy meat. The ones who do care are so very few and far between. I thank you for this video.
@EliteDoomer Thanks for your level headed and articulate expression of outrage to the horrific and frustrating ignorance forced upon us. As more people speak out we slowly advance this issue of human rights and eventually the tide changes. I relate to your outrage and work to keep my own in check by making these videos. Please keep using your intelligent and sane voice to encourage others.
@EliteDoomer Get involved with advocacy. TheWHOLEnetwork and DrMomma.org are good places with lots of different avenues.
Another outlet for you(us) is to systematically stretch the remaining skin for a while (years) to create the appearance and nominally protective functions of a foreskin. It is referred to as restoration, but I hesitate to use that term first because I've seen some delusional psycho-pricks catch it and think circ is not permanent. NORM + restoringforeskinDOTorg
@EliteDoomer - cc my thoughts - HEY EVERYBODY; LET ME TELL YOU A SECRET; IT'S A HOAX. It comes from the same source that snuffs out all other pleasures from the humankind by hoax. Judge them based on their current behavior, all over the world. Search for this youtube vid ---> Kosher Horror <---. YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE FURIOUS!!
@OyonTheAdept "foreskin restoration" is a farse. It does not return the nerve endings. It's basically another way for them to make money off of you. first they cut it off, then say "oh, you mean you didn't want that done? okay, well we can bring it back, it just won't be the same in any meaningful way and will cost you a ridiculous amount of money to fix something that we broke in the first place"
@vyyle actually, foreskin restoration removes layers and layers of tissue on the glans head of the penis., by doing so, a man's penis becomes more sensitive.
@OyonTheAdept that's utter bullshit. the glans is not MEANT to be exposed, and it's exposure causes it to thicken and keratanize, reducing the sensitivity of the glans. Add to that the fact the "layers and layers of tissue" you're removing is normally sensitive and erogenous by itself. There is a lot of documentation on this, and circumcision was originally promoted to prevent masturbation, in a large part because it made the penis LESS sensitive.
regardless, I maintain my original position that foreskin restoration is an utter farse. it's an attempt to fix something that should not have been broken in the first place. yeah, it's great that it gives men who are pissed off that their rights to body autonomy were violated by their parents and their doctors an option, but unless those parents or those doctors are flipping the bill, those men become victimized once again.
@vyyle I agree if only more people understood that they are removing the two most erogenous zones on the penis called the frenulum and the ridged band, maybe circumcision would decrease.
@EliteDoomer "i dont know how to calm the fires in my heart" fuck off loser,wat r we in 1950s..... you've got fucked up sex life cause u r fat and ugly......
The logic behind circumcision is to drive down your natural, inherent sex drive. It is a form of sexual repression, and if that is the reason people are not getting AIDS, because their libido decreased so that they are not able to have enough sexual encounters to get infected by AIDS, then this is torture and somebody needs to be accountable for misinforming the masses.
@banjski your point is valid, but you're language is wrong. technically, many children with foreskin have died. But in what is likely 99.9%+ of them, their foreskin status had absolutely nothing to do with their deaths, which is the point you wanted to make.
@vyyle Ok... let us see something... How much European adults have forskin on their penis? Or in Asia? Question is quite simple: why they do not die with forskin as a boys?
Another question is - why the underage child in America or Israel or Iran?
Amputation is not health. Only the money and sick people can advocate destruction of unprotected child in terror and tears. It is sex crime! Adults touch or cut childs genitals? It is sick.. Without satisfied man there will be no satisfied woman.
you're failing to see my point. I'm stating that the language you're trying to argue with is false.
your original statement was, "no one underage boy died with a foreskin - many of them died without." This is blatantly false.
deaths from circumcision is a small children who die. the vast majority of children die from accidents(vehicles, falls, etc.). if even one uncircumcised boy in the history of the world died in a car accident, then your original statement was wrong.
Do not care about the way I spoke about this brutality - better take the care about tied up and screaming babies under brutal 30 minutes live torture on their nerve system for nothing more but the money.
Again, I'm not arguing that circumcision on infant's isn't barbaric. I'm well aware of arguments against it, and would agree vehemently that it should be abolished, the sooner the better.
I was just pointing out that the argument that you made was poorly phrased, and incorrect. The point you were trying to make was valid, I was only trying to help you improve your argument to better match that point. I'm sorry that you seem unwilling to take that help.
@vyyle It's interesting how people are so quick to dismiss the 100s of babies who die from forced circumcision annually as a "minute number." Meanwhile in our society, even the hint of a death is enough to recall toys, 30 deaths is enough to recall every single crib ever made, 14* deaths resulted in an entire industry change for babywearing and 77* choking deaths resulted in the AAP asking to change hotdog shapes. But death by circumcision doesn't count?
@jenniferlindsayreed I never dismissed them...I'm also an opponent of infant circumcision. if you think otherwise because of my exchange w/ banjski, you've misread my responses; I was only pointing out a claim he made that was phrased poorly and therefor terribly incorrect.
Can you refer me to this "parallel study" that found if you supply fresh water and soap to men you can reduce AIDS to the same degree as Circumcision? Thanks.
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but if more people in Africa get AIDS and die, it actually leaves open positions for someone else to butt in and exploits Africa's natural resources. Lying to people that they won't have to use condoms if they get skin chopped off their dick is mind boggling. And knowing that most butchers who do this crap came from Israel (that discourages this in their own country, but are willing to do it to others) fills me with a lot of rage.
@LannaDru You're thinking too much into this. It's easier to exploit natural resources if you don't kill anyone; more cheap unskilled labor.
Circumcision in Africa is just another civilizing mission. We may be past the era of institutionalized racism, but whites are still driven to help these poor Africans, only now with the panacea of MGM to rid them of their troubles. We can't even help them keep political order and safety in their countries or afford the most basic Western commodities.
@Mystoksor I'm a bit confused by your response. On one hand, you're calling this butchering organization a civilizing mission, while on th other, you refer to circumcision by it's true name, male genital mutilation. I take it that you think that this is a case of "charity gone wrong"?
@LannaDru Precisely. "Civilizing mission" was the term given by Europeans during their colonization of Africa who thought it was their responsibility to bring Christianity and the supposedly greater Western culture to colonized Africans. I see the same rationale behind America and its institutions of global governance trying to solve all of Africa's problems with circumcision while we can't even provide them with the help they really need.
It has already started to backfire, in Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Swaziland men are more likely to have HIV if they are circumcised.
Chop off your penis, it's good for you!!! LMAO, another of mankind's DUMB ASS ideas. Fuck religion, & fuck stupid quacks who call themselves doctors. Dr Dean Edell is the real deal.
Subsaharan africa and the United States have 2 things in common, the highest HIV/AIDS rates on top of the highest circumcision rates. There seems to be a problem with the idea that the two are even linked, even if germs hide out more. Though I can't seem to get under my foreskin dirty, not that I've tried, but its the cleanest part of my body.
@Mrmoc7 The moral (and ethicial) argument against circumcision is very easy to make, it's the child's body, not the parents', not the doctor's, not society's. The scientific argument against circumcision is also easy to make, Dr. Edell has been an outspoken critic of forced genital surgery on children for a long time.
One of the problems with genital mutilation of children is that those on whom it has been done and those who have done this to others rarely wish to hear any argument against it.
"One of the problems with genital mutilation of children is that those on whom it has been done and those who have done this to others rarely wish to hear any argument against it."
That's not an argument, it's a fallacy. It's an Ad-hominem circumstancia.
Secondly, the argument that the 'chid's" body belongs to that child while it is still a child does not hold much water. What then, do you say of vaccinations? Why should parents have the right to decide that for their children?
"There are no legitimate arguments to support cutting healthy, genital tissue from a healthy infant or child."
This is our point of dissension. I contend that there is no legitimate reason to believe the quality of a child's life is diminished in anyway, and there is a very sound reason to support cutting off the male foreskin. Take note that you're arguing against circumcision, generally speaking, while I'm only arguing for MALE circumcision, but not female.
@Mrmoc7 You seem to be incapable of understanding a simple basic human right, body integrity. Every child has that inherent right. I support adults choosing to do what they wish with their own bodies. If an adult wishes to have their own genitals cut down for any reason, pierced or tattooed hopefully they are fully informed of the risks. I am opposed to forcing genital surgery on anyone male or female without their expressed adult consent.
@Mrmoc7 It really doesn't matter whether you feel the quality of a child's life is diminished in any way because its none of your business. From the perspective of human rights it's the individual upon whom circumcision has been forced that must be taken into account. If you think there are sound reasons to cut off the male foreskin then have YOUR foreskin cut off. Children need to be legally protected from such insanity.
@Mrmoc7, despite the HIV pandemic (over 25 years), you have NO sound evidence circumcision curbs HIV or any STD in your nation (USA) or any other developed one! If you advocate for circumcision, then GIVE evidence that your alleged benefits will outweigh the risk of harm (and that's without even discussing the LOSS of healthy functional tissue - richly innervated & vascularized!). Funny that Americans insist circumcision has health benefits, when the USA represents such a poor example of that!
@Mrmoc7: "...you're arguing against circumcision, generally speaking, while I'm only arguing for MALE circumcision, but not female." This actually undermines your own case. Since the issue is not severity, or degree of barbarity or measurable effects on sexual function, but human rights, the only difference that remains is the sex of the child, so your position is fundamentally sexist. Why the double standard? Why do boys deserve less protection against human rights abuse than girls?
@Mrmoc7 "I contend that there is no legitimate reason to believe the quality of a child's life is diminished in anyway, " How exactly is it do you know this? Have you done a study wherein you had people with foreskins and could turn them on or off and have them tell you if it was different?
@Mrmoc7 Vaccinations themselves are a highly questionable procedure for anyone who has done any serious research on the subject. However, regardless of their efficacy they cannot and should not be compared with circumcision. Why? Because nothing is being taken. No body parts are being removed. There is no amputation here. No permanent physical damage is occuring.
@Mrmoc7 "the argument that the 'chid's" body belongs to that child while it is still a child does not hold much water. " This claim would hold some weight if you could give the man his foreskin back when he turns 18. But you can't. What you do to the child, you do to the man, so that the man's human rights are abused when you do it to the child.
@Mrmoc7 funny that such words as "ad-hominem" would come out of your mouth Mrmoc. . .afterall, weren't you the one calling someone an "idiot" and a "piece of shit?"
@Mrmoc7 I have thought about the vaccine angle myself. Childhood vaccines have, for sure, saved millions of children and adults from death/injury and don't take away a part of their body forever.
@Mrmoc7 Edell is not an expert on the subject. And anytime that someone uses personal anecdotes to move you to a generalization, beware! Yes, as a medical practitioner, by today's standards, he's an idiot... a neanderthal in his approach. Today we use evidence based medicine to make decisions; and overwhelming evidence supports the use of circumcision in Africa. We don't make decisions because we've gone to Africa and talked to a few people about what they might do if they had a circumcision.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru The "research" consists solely of biased studies with insufficient sample spaces and poor execution. For example, the circumcised men were instructed to clean. What's more, they couldn't have sex for a while after their circumcision, artificially reducing that group's HIV transmission rate. Edell is just bringing some common sense into this issue: why do the regions with the highest circ rate also have the highest rate of AIDS, and vice versa?
@Mystoksor "sample spaces" doesn't mean anything at all. You made that term up, which is silly because I'm a doctor and I read journal articles everyday... trust me, it's utter nonsense. Your comment is tantamount to a child's scribbling in crayon about a boogie man.
You're entitled to your opinion. But I recommend you do more reading and less emotive argument creating.
So supply a scholarly source that discusses what you're suggesting. Otherwise you're just a poor liar.
If circumcision is such a viable prophylactic against HIV, then why do the US and Southern Africa have such high rates of HIV transmission and also such high rates of circumcision? Why does Europe, in which circumcision is almost never performed, have such a low rate of HIV?
@Mystoksor So when was the last time you took a preventive medicine course? I took it in my 2nd yr of med school. One of us knows how to interpret a journal article. Now who might that be?
What is NNT? NNH? Odds ratio? Absolute risk? Oh, you don't know these terms? Sorry, let me dumb it down to your intellectual pay-grade:
Circ has only demonstrated prevention of HIV transmission in vaginal sex. In the US & Europe the majority of cases are homosexual. S. Africa is considering implementing circ
@AllknowingGuitarGuru If you don't know what a sample space is, it's obvious you just googled some statistical buzzwords to sound smart.
If you look at the studies objectively, you'll see how flawed they are. The sample space in each of them is insufficient and have little in the way of variable control. The circumcised men were instructed to wash regularly and in addition were forced to abstain from sex to heal. Do you know what happens if measure one dependent variable with >1 independents?
@Mystoksor Looks like someone lost their sense of sarcasm in the ether. Get a grip on your uncircumcised self and try re-reading for humor.
A well design medical study has only one ind var. But confounders occur in virtually all medical studies. And since we're playing this cute little game, give three ways to adjust for these confounders.
If you're truly a man of science, name the papers and we'll discuss their respective protocols, otherwise you're purposely being vague and out of context.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru Let's skip the testing. I know the conditions of good experimental design and I'll assume you do as well.
There are a handfull of studies on circumcision and AIDS in Africa, but how about we start out with "Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Rakai, Uganda"? That and the one conducted in Kisumu Kenya are the two that were prematurely ended because the use of a control group was deemed "unethical" by the experiments' conductors.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru Just thought I'd refute your assumption that I opposed circumcision because it had never been performed on me ("Get a grip on your uncircumcised self.") Most of the men opposing circumcision have been circumcised themselves.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru Ok, let's start with Gray et al. Firstly, the circumcised men were told to abstain from sex for a minimum of six weeks. What about the HIV-positive circumcised men in the study? How can you expect reasonable results when in societies like Uganda, circumcised men can expect a "higher class" of sex partners? I'm not saying that we can expect a perfect study, but the conductors should have taken that into account when making the boastful "50%" claim.
@Mystoksor Did you read the study. Let me know if you need a copy. I can send you a pdf file.
Okay, so while they asked the circumcised men to abstain, it was only until wound healing was complete (~2 weeks). If you're arguing that the education (safe sex) is a confounder, you should know that the control group was also question about at risk behavior and both groups were given free condoms.
The "higher class" groups you're referring to, aka, confounders were adjusted using stratification.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru 6 weeks was advised for recovery, not 2. There were also 30 circumcised men who were HIV positive when they entered the trial. A man's partner isn't going to transmit HIV to him if he's already positive for the virus. What I meant by the claim was that saying circumcision reduces HIV transmission by 50 or 60% doesn't bother to mention that an intact man has a 2.4% chance of transmission versus 1.6% in a circumcised man. Another reason why a larger sample space is desirable
@Mystoksor My bad, they don't actually quote an average recovery time. But surgical follow-up are done 24-48 hrs, 5-9 days, and 4-6 weeks. However, in infants the healing time is approx one week.
6461 men were screened, of those the ones who were HIV+ were eliminated from the study.
Sample Space: Where are you getting the 2.4 and the 1.6%? I'm not following how, even if these odd were true, divergent odds would require more possible outcomes? The two outcomes are prevention versus null.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru My bad too, upon further inspection. They suggest a recovery period of 6 weeks in the discussion of further research (even though they called the continuation of their own unethical). 2.4% is the approximate chance an uncut man has of receiving HIV from a positive partner during one sexual encounter. I'd like to see the raw data myself, but to the extent of my knowledge, it hasn't been made available. Technically, 2.4 is 150% of 1.6 but the statistic is still misleading.
@Mystoksor I'm not following your use of these numbers. That was the point of the study, to determine the modified risk produced by circumcision. Those numbers are what is being derived in the study. And 2. 4 vs 1.6 is not cited in this study.
If you could cite your source for the numbers it would be enlightening.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru I'll dig up those numbers. I'm confident that Gray or one of his colleagues on the "Rakai" study though I see it's not mentioned in the study itself.
Likewise, it's been a pleasure. I should probably get some work done myself >.>
@Mystoksor "boastful "50%" claim"... That is not how science works. Like I said before studies such as these are rigorously peer reviewed by thousands of doctors and claims need to merited by the use of good analysis.
What you want to look at is the p-value and confidence interval to know if the percentage found in the study means anything
One does not need a 50% difference to claim success. If circumcision reduced the risk by 20% it could still be argued that it's a valuable preventive tool.
@AllknowingGuitarGuru All that said, I still respect the studies, at least as much as I respect the other studies conducted in the same region showing a higher rate of HIV contraction among circumcised men. And Edell does raise an interesting point: how are we going to implement this kind of treatment program when so many forms of humanitarian aid are underfunded or altogether unfeasible? The movement to circumcise men in Africa smacks of another civilizing mission in my humble opinion.
@Mystoksor "How can you expect reasonable results when in societies like Uganda, circumcised men can expect a "higher class" of sex partners?"
"Treatment assignment was randomly generated in blocks of 20, stratified on community, with each community receiving four blocks of 20 assignment envelopes" (Gray 1999)
@Mystoksor "There are a handfull of studies on circumcision and AIDS in Africa, but how about we start out with "Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Rakai, Uganda"? That and the one conducted in Kisumu Kenya are the two that were prematurely ended because the use of a control group was deemed "unethical" by the experiments' conductors."
@AllknowingGuitarGuru So I couldn't remember the exact name of the study. Are you really going to go this crazy over the semantics? Do you actually want to debate or just fling insults?
@Mystoksor Seriously, you talking about one study you can't remember the name of, but you insist is flawed. And you're quoting it? You do know that all these studies are peer reviewed, don't you?
@AllknowingGuitarGuru I'm also starting to appreciate how difficult it is to have a serious debate on youtube. So if you'd like, we could just go back to the insults. What better way to display to the world the sophistication of the circumcision & AIDS debates?
@Mystoksor Let's not skip the pop quiz... it sounds like big fun.
And let's either talk about the protocols for the study or meta analysis I suggested, or you suggest one. This talking about these nameless "handful of studies" is unscholarly and a waste of time.
You either know your stuff or you don't. And if you don't have access to the journals, never fear. I have my institutional accounts with JAMA, Up-to-date, AIDS and many other journals.
@Mystoksor Shall we start with the Weiss meta analysis? Or the Gray, Kiwanuka and Quinn; Male circumcision and HIV acquisition and transmission: cohort studies in Rakai, Uganda. AIDS. 2000 Oct 20?
I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time with someone who was trying to use an ecological study design to determine the efficacy of circumcision, ie, comparing countries.
But go ahead, give it your best shot.
However, cite specific deficiencies, because vagueness is for pseudo-intellects and sissies.
Can I dumb something down for you? Lookup on how to catch any disease is through the urethra. what does foreskin have to do with it. All these Africa studies are lies.
"Today we use evidence based medicine to make decisions" Why not SCIENCE based medicine?.. just because it is evidence, doesn't guarantee it is VALID evidence.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Dr. Dean Edell claims in this video that a study showed that providing men soap was as effective as medically performed male circumcision with counseling for HIV prevention. If this study in fact exists, please provide the reference for it so that I can read it. Also, the studies in Africa clearly showed that the net effect of MPCWC was to REDUCE total HIV transmission, contrary to his suggestion that it might be increased.
@AIDSvideos You seem selectively knowledgeable on circumcision and HIV. Surprised you haven't heard about the finding viz hygiene and reduced risk of HIV infection. Aidsmap has reported on it. The citation is: O’Farrell N et al. Association between HIV and subpreputial penile wetness in uncircumcised men in South Africa. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 43: 69 – 77, 2006.
@MCandHIV: *Thank you* for providing the full study reference. I read it. If this is the study that Dr. Edell was referring to, then he has misstated its results. Contrary to what he says in the video, this study did not show that an intervention of providing men in Africa with soap and fresh water achieved comparable HIV risk reductions to those achieved by MPCWC (50% reduction). It simply showed an association between penile wetness under the foreskin and rate of HIV infection.
@AIDSvideos Authors conclude hygiene was compelling factor, suggest improved hygienic conditions as alternative to c. A synthesis of this & other studies drives the objective concl'n that as btwn altern.'s, circ is not the better choice + additional ben. in providing hygienic conditions. You no doubt are aware of the huge complication rates in c. (34%-42%). Male circ. for HIV prevention: a prospective study of complications in clinical and trad'al settings .... Bull. of WHO 86(9):669-677. 2008.
@MCandHIV: I read that study. In it, the 35% complication rate was for TRADITIONAL circumcisions (which neither I nor WHO advocate); MPC had an adverse-event rate of 17.7%. Your point that current standards of practice for MPC in the field in Africa may not match the standards in the clinical trials, and that the risk of complications may be higher, is fair; that's an argument for improving the standards and conditions for performing MPCWC, not proof that MPCWC should be abandoned.
@AIDSvideos My argument concerning complications is an argument to avoid circumcision as an alleged HIV prevention measure because reality has impinged on the grand plans of AIDS researchers and implementers over and over again. The marginal gain from circumcision will be and is being offset by losses to disinhibition and complications. Anything else is wishful thinking. Prevention that works without side effects are well known: education, condoms, reduce concurrent partners.
@MCandHIV: As same study noted: "That circumcision can be performed safely on young adults in clinical settings in Africa has been shown in Kisumu, Kenya, and in Orange Farm, South Africa, where the rates of adverse events were 1.7% and 3.6%, respectively, and most of these were mild. However, these were in the highly monitored and well-equipped contexts of clinical trials." MPCWC *can* be done safely and effectively. Doing this at scale won't be easy but there's no evidence it's impossible.
@AIDSvideos "Can be" has been a rallying cry for the AIDS industry for two decades now. However, the track record of implementing anything other than effective but less glamorous prevention programs has been poor to disastrous. Circumcision will produce death and suffering. Mass circumcision is inviting catastrophe. The implementers are denialist on this fact or simply won't address the issue for fear of losing their funding.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Bonobo3D: As is typical of radical anti-circumcision activists, when someone presents the scientific evidence for medically performed circumcision of adults with counseling, you immediately and falsely accuse them of advocating infant circumcision. Circumcision of consenting adults and circumcision of infants are SEPARATE ISSUES. Only radical anti-circumcision activists are incapable of (or unwilling to) distinguish them.
@AIDSvideos Indeed circumcision of consenting adults and forcing circumcision upon infants and children who cannot understand or consent have different ethical and legal implications. So far all of the circumcision being pushed on Africa to "prevent AIDS" has made no such distinction. Quack doctors like Becky Kuhn and phoneys like Stephen Lewis expose themselves as unwilling to consider the human rights of children in their zeal to force circumcision upon everyone.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Bonobo3D: I should point out that Dr. Kuhn is a licensed medical doctor and your calling her a "quack" is libel. You should be more cautious in throwing around labels like that. Your claim that the promotion of MPCWC for male adults in Africa has failed to distinguish between adult and infant circumcision is also false. UNAIDS press releases on this topic clearly discussed medically performed circumcision with counseling for adults, not circumcision of infants.
@AIDSvideos Perhaps I should have said that she appears to be quack like in the same way John Harvey Kellogg appeared to be. The history of circumcision is full of quack like behaviour on the part of so called doctors.
As soon as the press release went out opportunists like Neil Pollock was in Rwanda cutting babies, "saving lives." He never showed interest in HIV medicine before that. His specialty is male genial mutilation of infant boys. The 140 year history of medial fraud continues.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Many of Dr. Dean Edell's statements here about medically performed circumcision of with counseling (MPCWC) are misleading or are irrelevant and are contradicted by the findings of published, peer-reviewed scientific studies. Three separate studies *in Africa* have shown that MPCWC is safe and effective for reducing the rate of HIV infections through heterosexual sex among men who are circumcised. The net number of HIV infections was reduced BY HALF versus control subjects.
@AIDSvideos Education about safe sex prevents HIV infection.
Lopping off the most sexually sensate part of a penis for specious prophylactic excuses; touting genital mutilation as a "safe and effective method" for preventing anything and everything has a 140 year history of medical quackery and fraud. This is an issue of human rights. Genital integrity vs medical fraud.
Dr. Dean Edell has a keen grasp of this issue. I suggest you listen carefully to the points he makes in this video again.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Bonobo3D: As is typical of radical anti-circumcision activists, you wrongly assume that those who disagree with you do not understand your arguments. I listened to this video twice. The problem is not that I do not understand Dr. Edell's statements. The problem is that his claim that MPCWC may increase HIV transmission contradicts the findings of all three published peer-reviewed scientific studies of the effectiveness of MPCWC for HIV prevention in Africa. He is wrong.
@AIDSvideos You are wrong. Edell has been very clear in pointing out all of the weaknesses with your so-called studies.
As a human being who believes in the rights of all children to genital integrity I'm very aware that some "who disagree with me" may not understand or believe that children have this basic human right. That's about as simple as I can make it for you. Thankfully other countries are starting to speak up.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Bonobo3D: Dr. Edell speculates about hypothetical scenarios that MIGHT happen if adult men are circumcised with counseling. The published, peer-reviewed scientific studies show what DOES IN FACT HAPPEN, contradicting the fears he raises in his speculation.
@AIDSvideos The problems w/ the African RCTs are largely rooted in researcher and self-reporting bias. Both are exaggerated in the RCT context bec. the researchers were all and continue to be circumcision advocates from the beginning of their careers and all the men were volunteers seeking circumcision first and a method to deal with HIV risk a distant second. The high drop out rates in follow-up indicate those who seroconverted lost interest or ability to continue, thereby skewing the results.
@MCandHIV: There is no researcher or self-reporting bias in the results of HIV tests, which were used to measure the actual HIV infection rates among the test (MPCWC) and control (counseling) subjects. The 3 studies all passed independent peer review and no evidence of bias that would influence the results was found. There's no evidence that selective drop-out rates invalidate the results or even call them in to question. You are simply denying the research findings because you don't like them.
@AIDSvideos The researcher bias is in the interpretation and wild extrapolition of the results. Many disagree with you that self report and drop out affect valid conclusions of the studies. Peer review does not end the discussion or make the studies unassailable. The analysis continues. You should join it by looking at the raw data. You clearly like the idea of circumcision. But that doesn't make criticism any less valid just because you're in the camp that supports the practice.
@AIDSvideos Why is it "radical" to support and work for the human rights of all children to genital integrity? Your comment reveals prejudice against normal genitals, the primary motivation for genital mutilation of children is this prejudice you show.
@RoseFink: I'm not saying that all people who oppose infant circumcision are radicals by any means. The "radicals" are people who: (1) immediately accuse anyone who cites the scientific evidence for MPCWC of adults of also supporting infant circumcision, which is a separate issue and practice; (2) deny the scientific evidence of safety and effectiveness of MPCWC for HIV prevention as shown by three trials in Africa; (3) seem to be highly emotional and incapable of discussing this rationally.
@AIDSvideos History has repeatedly shown that those with an agenda to promote circumcision make no distinction whatsoever between consenting adults choosing circumcision and forcing it upon infants and children. In fact all of the psychotically sick adults who use their medical credentials to promote genital mutilation of children purposely ignore human rights of children to profit from this insanity.
@RoseFink: I do not oppose those who argue against infant circumcision. My comments about MPCWC do not show "prejudice against normal genitals." They show that I've read the studies about MPCWC and HIV prevention in Africa and understand the results. To be clear, to the extent I have an opinion at all, I probably oppose infant circumcision as an elective medical procedure, with risks, without benefit I know before sexual debut, which the child could decide for themselves about later.
@AIDSvideos Your opinion on the matter is not ipso facto evidence that you have read the studies and understand them. It shows you accept the conclusions of the authors of the studies. Others of course may draw different conclusions than you from the raw data, and/or consider additional factors not considered by the authors.
@AIDSvideos You can't deny the controversy. The fact many question the ethics of imposing circumcision by raising false or unrealistic expectations therefrom creates a practical complication that requires consideration in any decision to promote it. Even the authors of the studies concede it's a number game. Not enough uptake or too much risk disinhibition, and it's worse than a wash due to the complication and death rates common in resource poor settings + higher HIV rates from disinhibition.
@MCandHIV: The existence of "controversy" proves nothing. There is "controversy" about the theory of evolution, but that doesn't mean there's any question about what the scientific evidence shows. Your statement that MPCWC is "worse than a wash" is simply false. The studies clearly showed that the ACTUAL rate of HIV infection (not self-report, but as shown by test) was reduced by 50%. If any disinhibition occurred, the protective effect of MPCWC more than compensated for it.
@AIDSvideos The assertion that the results are worse than a wash is prospective prediction based on the shortcomings of the studies and evidence in countries that circumcise and see rates of HIV similar or higher in circumcised men. It is in the interpretation of the data prospectively that matters, not the clinical outcomes because the clinical conditions are unlikely to be repeated in the real world. If you were open minded and not already sold on circ, you would know these criticisms already.
Dr. (Ha!) I should trust his opinion when he's only an eye doctor hired by ABC Channel 7 San Francisco as a real authority
DOMSBRAT 1 day ago
@DOMSBRAT Sounds like you're looking for justification for forced genital cutting of children. You won't find it from Dean Edell. He has taken the ETHICAL stance that healthy children DO NOT NEED immediate reductive surgery to the genitals.
Dean Edell has spoken for many years on the most basic human right of ALL children to their birthright, the whole body they were born with.
Look elsewhere if you are looking for justification for sexual mutilation of children.
Bonobo3D 1 day ago 2
@Bonobo3D THE MOST BASIC RIGHT OF CHILDREN IS TO BE BORN AND NOT ABORTED! Please don't talk to me in absolutes when it comes to rights, because the talk of rights is null and void if the child has none because it's a nothing until it has the right from some human who will allow it to be born.
Our rights and the come from God not the state or another human being.
DOMSBRAT 1 day ago
@DOMSBRAT Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Child, principals 9 and 10.
Bonobo3D 1 day ago
@Bonobo3D . I don't recognize the U.N. on anything, it's more than obvious you would. 2. If you have this fetish than keep it to yourself, I really don't wish to continue any further conversation with a childish person. 3. Your more worried about some piece of skin that is actually useless to men except for fetish, than you are about the innocent right to life. 4. Parents don't need more government telling then how to live. 5. Can you digest that without bothering me any more?
DOMSBRAT 22 hours ago
@DOMSBRAT No bother at all that's what I'm here for. And you are here and commenting of your own accord.
There really isn't any need for further laws to protect boys since forced circumcision by legal definition is BATTERY and ASSAULT.
Girls are expressly protected by law from any and all genital cutting, even a ritual nick will send parents and doctors to jail. Boys need the laws equalized and enforced to protect them and THEIR genitals as well.
Bonobo3D 12 hours ago
Anyone else think that trying to censure the data coming from circumcision advocates, makes the intactivist viewpoint ring hollow?
Whether or not there are benefits, it's not the parents right to choose. It's our SONS bodies. Soo, In light of that, I don't think it's clever to simply refute evidence of benefit. We should be better than that.
ryoshi100 3 weeks ago
@ryoshi100 It's my RIGHT as a parent to circumcise, I suggest you shut your fat mouth like a good putz and stop telling others what to do.
MrJewishWarrior 1 week ago
@MrJewishWarrior Parents do NOT have the "right" to cut off normal, healthy, erogenous body parts. Circumcision is abuse.
Bonobo3D 1 week ago 2
@MrJewishWarrior I a one of the very few intactivists who doesn't blindly deny the medical benefits and actualy support parents who have religious convictions on this issue. I speak about people who do this as a matter of habit but without any thought. When a Jewish person chooses it, there is a conscience eement due to their covenant. That's not the same as just "my dad was so ill do it too".btw, I know I'm black, but my mouth isn't that big I don't go after jewish noses
ryoshi100 6 days ago
@ryoshi100 "When a Jewish person chooses it, there is a conscience eement due to their covenant."
Religious justification is only for those that believe in God. Secular Jews are not bound to make a male-only Covenenant.
feministsAreCorrupt 6 days ago
how the FUCK does getting circumcised make you more resistant against STD's?
watcheem 1 month ago in playlist Genital Integrity
@watcheem You haven't read any of the studies i'm assuming, Goyim are so uneducated nowadays
MrJewishWarrior 1 week ago
@Bonobo3D Education begins with research. I'm not denying in the least that condoms & other methods of prevention work. They work. As for Africans being oppressed it's been going on for over 1000 years & it's hardly gotten better. But people doing solid research trying to slow the AIDS crisis in Africa should not get automatically dismissed as exploitative/colonialist. No one should be forced to undergo circumcision. But if a study shows circumcision helps the info should be shared.
pjherron 1 month ago
@pjherron If circumcision worked then it would be easily replicated with another study. The study that is being touted is bogus, those who are insisting on it refuse to replicate it. That is junk science and medical fraud. The rush to accept circumcision is revealing about the unscrupulous motivations of the promoters.
Bonobo3D 1 month ago 2
@Bonobo3D circumcision is for your own good, you dumb Goyim know nothing on the benefits this surgery brings to society.
MrJewishWarrior 1 week ago
@MrJewishWarrior LIves ruined by this abuse of children include countless deaths, penile abatements, gangrene, botched circumcisions, see the Global Survey of Circumcision Harm.
Bonobo3D 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrJewishWarrior "you dumb Goyim know nothing on the benefits this surgery brings to society"
What are these benefits? Does the US (80% circumcised) have an obviously lower HIV and STD infection rate when compared to similar Western nations such as the UK or Germany with very low circumcisions? No. The US has a notably higher HIV rate and nearly identical STD rates.
Circumcision for disease prevention is a flop. The US mass circumcision experiment is the proof.
feministsAreCorrupt 6 days ago
When it comes to Africa for the longest time I've thought that most of these current relief efforts are "fubar".
Think about it. Some times these organizations make adds which read something like this: "Last year you helped to save 20 000 lives. We need your help this year to save more."
I wonder how many of those saved ones are were the same who were saved the year before?
We need to get rid of the problem. Not just feed them. I say we should help them to help themselves.
We can do that.
BlizBob 1 month ago in playlist Genital Integrity
This has been flagged as spam show
pls thumbs up so people can see:
I know this is the YouTube community and it is a long-shot but please, I have been mutilated and I will never know what it feels like to be a complete man again, I hate my parents so much for it.
Please donate to Foregen (dot) org
An organization dedicated to regenerating whatever is needed so people like me, and millions, will have the chance to be complete once again after being mutilated against our wills.
Pass this around to circ videos to speak.out!
BUGZdood 2 months ago in playlist Doctors Opposing Circumcision = genital mutilation
"This is not going to be a positive time in Western medical history" -- Well said, but still the understatement of the millenium. To even think where we could be if actual compassion and a real interest in human-rights issues and proper science led our way is just shocking. To witness all that misled and misleading nonsense rule instead is embarassing. Also, I'm concerned that the millions of men who are being mutilated will only remember that it was done by Western people. There will be blood.
Pastor9764 5 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"I can tell ya somethin'" & frowning & use of loaded rhetorical terms like "silly" & then citing unnamed studies is the very epitome of unsound and misleading information. Even more fascinating is Dr. Edell's curious employment of postcolonialism rhetoric.
The UN study claims not a prevention of AIDS but a reduction of AIDS across a population. AIDS is a terrible horrible plague in Africa and it's hardly colonialist for people around the world--not just people in the West--to want to help.
pjherron 5 months ago
@pjherron People around the world can help end AIDS in Africa and every place with EDUCATION and proven methods of prevention, like CONDOMS. Genital cutting, forced or coerced upon people as we are seeing in African countries, is a medical fraud. There is much to this discussion that cannot be presented in one video.
Bonobo3D 5 months ago 13
This has been flagged as spam show
Behind the "indicative medical reasons" we can find a lot of sick brains who starve to mutilate kids penis and pharmaceutical mafia. Dear babykillers, keep your brutality for your own babies and kids. Do not spread your lies any more for no one other. The little boy have a personal religious reason for this? Indeed? Better dead than intact? Bye sicko!
banjski 6 months ago
Comment removed
banjski 6 months ago
No sex - no aids.
No foreskin no joy in sex.
No clit no joy in sex.
And population will be down.
Brutality of sick persons with money and little influence...
banjski 6 months ago
2:55 "a parallel study that got no press whatsoever"
Where can I find the original publication of that soap and water study?
loqiloqi 7 months ago
I find myself feeling enraged, depressed, and finally exhausted by the sheer ignorance of my society. What was taken from me goes far beyond a healthy piece of sexual tissue (as if that isn't enough to cause protest). My choice to identify with MY body in what way seems best to me was taken along with much of my sexual confidence, and after all the confusion of emotions after years of therapy I am simply exhausted. You cannot cure the ignorance of others, because that is their choice. Ironic...
sp00nytube 9 months ago 7
Thank You Dr Dean Edell. I wish there was more people like you in the 70s
1SixpenceFan 10 months ago 2
Do people even realize that these scientists that perform these tests in Africa are actually affiliated with doctors and will lie and make up numbers to suit them. There is only one motive for doctors to continue circumcision and that is big money. In the past doctors used to say that having foreskin caused epilepsy, curvature of the spine, hallucinations and other absurd reasons and they are continuing to lie to people today as well.
TheYellowtulip 10 months ago 6
@TheYellowtulip That lie is used to brainwash the uneducated people like in africa. Pro-circ can't spread that lie to more educated countries like europe and most regions in the world were intact males are dominant.
karelin11 2 months ago
Circumcised men are more likely to get std's and aids because they are less sensitive so they feel less in condoms so they don't bother to use them and they bang as hard as a jackhammer to feel something causing tears on the penis head and In the delicate tissue of the vagina which causes bleeding.
TheYellowtulip 10 months ago 6
Circumcision is a conspiracy in order for drug companies to make money on antivirals. I have seen more cut men than uncut men with herpes blisters on their penis and promised myself never to date cut men again.
TheYellowtulip 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Choose a big beautiful woman as your partner naneedj.info
jennykopra 1 year ago
Thet is the same city of a RTC. How come we can not repeat the result?
chaoscraig5v7o 1 year ago
Released yesterday
"Circumcision status was not associated with HIV/HSV-2 infection nor increased high risk sexual behaviors. In males, preference for being or becoming circumcised was associated with inconsistent condom use and increased lifetime number of sexual partners." (1)
(1)Matthew Westercamp1,Male Circumcision in the General Population of Kisumu, Kenya: Beliefs about Protection, Risk Behaviors, HIV, and STIs
chaoscraig5v7o 1 year ago
Edell, take a hand full of vitamins and call me in the morning you QUACK. Dr Dean Edell, "King of Pharmacological Quackery"
TheLizardKing1967 1 year ago
HEY EVERYBODY; LET ME TELL YOU A SECRET; IT'S A HOAX. It comes from the same source that snuffs out all other pleasures from the humankind by hoax. Judge them based on their current behavior, all over the world. Search for this youtube vid ---> Kosher Horror <---. Don't be a victim
sainttuber 1 year ago
This is a great video.
endofscene 1 year ago 7
What you're saying is just simple logic that some people can't grasp. Put the idea into people's heads that circumcision = immunity from STDs, and many young boys and foolish men will think they have a license to have unprotected sex.Spreading myths like this is dangerous indeed.
TheWorstWarlock 1 year ago 10
thank you Creator. helped me with peace
andymission 1 year ago
So riddle me this Batman, why do you feel the need to do an ad hoc ecological study (in your Bat-Brain = rhymes) that compares the etiology of HIV in countries with divergent at risk populations? You do know that ecological studies are only used to identify trends, not to attribute causality, right?
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
I am filled with endless rage and hatred to think that I was fucking betrayed by the medical system, the legal system and my family. I was mutilated when I was too young to defend myself. I have a horrible sex life in which I cant orgasm while using condoms and society wants me to play nice!?!? I don't know how to calm the fires in my heart. Every apathetic human I see is just a walking mound of unworthy meat. The ones who do care are so very few and far between. I thank you for this video.
EliteDoomer 1 year ago 47
@EliteDoomer Thanks for your level headed and articulate expression of outrage to the horrific and frustrating ignorance forced upon us. As more people speak out we slowly advance this issue of human rights and eventually the tide changes. I relate to your outrage and work to keep my own in check by making these videos. Please keep using your intelligent and sane voice to encourage others.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 21
@EliteDoomer Get involved with advocacy. TheWHOLEnetwork and DrMomma.org are good places with lots of different avenues.
Another outlet for you(us) is to systematically stretch the remaining skin for a while (years) to create the appearance and nominally protective functions of a foreskin. It is referred to as restoration, but I hesitate to use that term first because I've seen some delusional psycho-pricks catch it and think circ is not permanent. NORM + restoringforeskinDOTorg
Good luck
MstislavSienkievich 1 year ago
@EliteDoomer - cc my thoughts - HEY EVERYBODY; LET ME TELL YOU A SECRET; IT'S A HOAX. It comes from the same source that snuffs out all other pleasures from the humankind by hoax. Judge them based on their current behavior, all over the world. Search for this youtube vid ---> Kosher Horror <---. YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE FURIOUS!!
sainttuber 1 year ago
@EliteDoomer Dude, i so agree with you, man.
but, just curious, have you heard of Foreskin Restoration? Google it if you don't.
OyonTheAdept 9 months ago
@OyonTheAdept "foreskin restoration" is a farse. It does not return the nerve endings. It's basically another way for them to make money off of you. first they cut it off, then say "oh, you mean you didn't want that done? okay, well we can bring it back, it just won't be the same in any meaningful way and will cost you a ridiculous amount of money to fix something that we broke in the first place"
vyyle 6 months ago
@vyyle actually, foreskin restoration removes layers and layers of tissue on the glans head of the penis., by doing so, a man's penis becomes more sensitive.
OyonTheAdept 6 months ago
@OyonTheAdept that's utter bullshit. the glans is not MEANT to be exposed, and it's exposure causes it to thicken and keratanize, reducing the sensitivity of the glans. Add to that the fact the "layers and layers of tissue" you're removing is normally sensitive and erogenous by itself. There is a lot of documentation on this, and circumcision was originally promoted to prevent masturbation, in a large part because it made the penis LESS sensitive.
vyyle 6 months ago
@vyyle wait, wtf? are you agreeing with me or disagreeing?
OyonTheAdept 6 months ago
@OyonTheAdept I misread your first response, sorry.
regardless, I maintain my original position that foreskin restoration is an utter farse. it's an attempt to fix something that should not have been broken in the first place. yeah, it's great that it gives men who are pissed off that their rights to body autonomy were violated by their parents and their doctors an option, but unless those parents or those doctors are flipping the bill, those men become victimized once again.
vyyle 6 months ago
@vyyle I agree if only more people understood that they are removing the two most erogenous zones on the penis called the frenulum and the ridged band, maybe circumcision would decrease.
TheYellowtulip 1 month ago
@EliteDoomer "i dont know how to calm the fires in my heart" fuck off loser,wat r we in 1950s..... you've got fucked up sex life cause u r fat and ugly......
muhammad152 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Visit FOREGEN.ORG! A charity that will use stem cells to regrow your foreskin!
chaoscraig5v7o 1 year ago
The logic behind circumcision is to drive down your natural, inherent sex drive. It is a form of sexual repression, and if that is the reason people are not getting AIDS, because their libido decreased so that they are not able to have enough sexual encounters to get infected by AIDS, then this is torture and somebody needs to be accountable for misinforming the masses.
akamola11 1 year ago 3
No one underage boy died with foreskin - many of them died without.
banjski 1 year ago 2
@banjski your point is valid, but you're language is wrong. technically, many children with foreskin have died. But in what is likely 99.9%+ of them, their foreskin status had absolutely nothing to do with their deaths, which is the point you wanted to make.
vyyle 6 months ago
@vyyle Ok... let us see something... How much European adults have forskin on their penis? Or in Asia? Question is quite simple: why they do not die with forskin as a boys?
Another question is - why the underage child in America or Israel or Iran?
Amputation is not health. Only the money and sick people can advocate destruction of unprotected child in terror and tears. It is sex crime! Adults touch or cut childs genitals? It is sick.. Without satisfied man there will be no satisfied woman.
banjski 6 months ago
@banjski pt1
you're failing to see my point. I'm stating that the language you're trying to argue with is false.
your original statement was, "no one underage boy died with a foreskin - many of them died without." This is blatantly false.
deaths from circumcision is a small children who die. the vast majority of children die from accidents(vehicles, falls, etc.). if even one uncircumcised boy in the history of the world died in a car accident, then your original statement was wrong.
vyyle 6 months ago
@banjski pt2
I'm not saying that circumcising a child is not wrong. It clearly is, and most who understand the issue would agree.
the point that you were trying to make - that circumcision endangers the life of the child, is correct.
The language you used to try to make your point argued that the death of every boy in the world was due to circumcision, which is not correct.
vyyle 6 months ago
@vyyle
Do not care about the way I spoke about this brutality - better take the care about tied up and screaming babies under brutal 30 minutes live torture on their nerve system for nothing more but the money.
banjski 6 months ago
@banjski
Again, I'm not arguing that circumcision on infant's isn't barbaric. I'm well aware of arguments against it, and would agree vehemently that it should be abolished, the sooner the better.
I was just pointing out that the argument that you made was poorly phrased, and incorrect. The point you were trying to make was valid, I was only trying to help you improve your argument to better match that point. I'm sorry that you seem unwilling to take that help.
vyyle 6 months ago
@banjski corrections to pt1
"deaths from circumcision is a small (percentage) of children who die"
"the vast majority of children (in 1st world) countries die from accidents"
vyyle 6 months ago
@vyyle It's interesting how people are so quick to dismiss the 100s of babies who die from forced circumcision annually as a "minute number." Meanwhile in our society, even the hint of a death is enough to recall toys, 30 deaths is enough to recall every single crib ever made, 14* deaths resulted in an entire industry change for babywearing and 77* choking deaths resulted in the AAP asking to change hotdog shapes. But death by circumcision doesn't count?
jenniferlindsayreed 5 months ago
@jenniferlindsayreed I never dismissed them...I'm also an opponent of infant circumcision. if you think otherwise because of my exchange w/ banjski, you've misread my responses; I was only pointing out a claim he made that was phrased poorly and therefor terribly incorrect.
vyyle 5 months ago
Can you refer me to this "parallel study" that found if you supply fresh water and soap to men you can reduce AIDS to the same degree as Circumcision? Thanks.
endofscene 1 year ago
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but if more people in Africa get AIDS and die, it actually leaves open positions for someone else to butt in and exploits Africa's natural resources. Lying to people that they won't have to use condoms if they get skin chopped off their dick is mind boggling. And knowing that most butchers who do this crap came from Israel (that discourages this in their own country, but are willing to do it to others) fills me with a lot of rage.
LannaDru 1 year ago 2
@LannaDru You're thinking too much into this. It's easier to exploit natural resources if you don't kill anyone; more cheap unskilled labor.
Circumcision in Africa is just another civilizing mission. We may be past the era of institutionalized racism, but whites are still driven to help these poor Africans, only now with the panacea of MGM to rid them of their troubles. We can't even help them keep political order and safety in their countries or afford the most basic Western commodities.
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor I'm a bit confused by your response. On one hand, you're calling this butchering organization a civilizing mission, while on th other, you refer to circumcision by it's true name, male genital mutilation. I take it that you think that this is a case of "charity gone wrong"?
LannaDru 1 year ago
@LannaDru Precisely. "Civilizing mission" was the term given by Europeans during their colonization of Africa who thought it was their responsibility to bring Christianity and the supposedly greater Western culture to colonized Africans. I see the same rationale behind America and its institutions of global governance trying to solve all of Africa's problems with circumcision while we can't even provide them with the help they really need.
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Good. For a second, I thought you were serious.
LannaDru 1 year ago
It has already started to backfire, in Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Swaziland men are more likely to have HIV if they are circumcised.
someguy672 1 year ago
Chop off your penis, it's good for you!!! LMAO, another of mankind's DUMB ASS ideas. Fuck religion, & fuck stupid quacks who call themselves doctors. Dr Dean Edell is the real deal.
rayj778 1 year ago 8
@rayj778 Don't generalize religious people. Not all African Muslims severely genitally mutilate their daughters, just most of them.
RomansPwnedJesus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
a bizarre custom that reeks of gay culture. i mean, what could be more homoerotic than transforming the natural penis into an object de art?
a father and son bonded by penis appearance also seems inappropriate for a healthy family atmosphere.
it's also the cultural seed of mutilation that led to female circumscision.
MsThunderroad 1 year ago
Thank you Dr. Dean. Is there a way you can live and inform us for the next three hundred years? I suspect not but your time hear has been invaluable.
We love you!
njmikec 1 year ago
Subsaharan africa and the United States have 2 things in common, the highest HIV/AIDS rates on top of the highest circumcision rates. There seems to be a problem with the idea that the two are even linked, even if germs hide out more. Though I can't seem to get under my foreskin dirty, not that I've tried, but its the cleanest part of my body.
spartacandream 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This idiot is making a moral argument against circumcision, but not a scientific argument. What a piece of shit.
Mrmoc7 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7 The moral (and ethicial) argument against circumcision is very easy to make, it's the child's body, not the parents', not the doctor's, not society's. The scientific argument against circumcision is also easy to make, Dr. Edell has been an outspoken critic of forced genital surgery on children for a long time.
One of the problems with genital mutilation of children is that those on whom it has been done and those who have done this to others rarely wish to hear any argument against it.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 3
@Bonobo3D
"One of the problems with genital mutilation of children is that those on whom it has been done and those who have done this to others rarely wish to hear any argument against it."
That's not an argument, it's a fallacy. It's an Ad-hominem circumstancia.
Secondly, the argument that the 'chid's" body belongs to that child while it is still a child does not hold much water. What then, do you say of vaccinations? Why should parents have the right to decide that for their children?
Mrmoc7 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7 Removing healthy, unique body parts cannot be equated with vaccinations.
Body ownership, the concept that every human being owns and has a say in their own body is part of the discussion of human rights.
There are no legitimate arguments to support cutting healthy, genital tissue from a healthy infant or child.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 12
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Bonobo3D
"There are no legitimate arguments to support cutting healthy, genital tissue from a healthy infant or child."
This is our point of dissension. I contend that there is no legitimate reason to believe the quality of a child's life is diminished in anyway, and there is a very sound reason to support cutting off the male foreskin. Take note that you're arguing against circumcision, generally speaking, while I'm only arguing for MALE circumcision, but not female.
Mrmoc7 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7 You seem to be incapable of understanding a simple basic human right, body integrity. Every child has that inherent right. I support adults choosing to do what they wish with their own bodies. If an adult wishes to have their own genitals cut down for any reason, pierced or tattooed hopefully they are fully informed of the risks. I am opposed to forcing genital surgery on anyone male or female without their expressed adult consent.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 15
@Mrmoc7 It really doesn't matter whether you feel the quality of a child's life is diminished in any way because its none of your business. From the perspective of human rights it's the individual upon whom circumcision has been forced that must be taken into account. If you think there are sound reasons to cut off the male foreskin then have YOUR foreskin cut off. Children need to be legally protected from such insanity.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 32
@Mrmoc7, despite the HIV pandemic (over 25 years), you have NO sound evidence circumcision curbs HIV or any STD in your nation (USA) or any other developed one! If you advocate for circumcision, then GIVE evidence that your alleged benefits will outweigh the risk of harm (and that's without even discussing the LOSS of healthy functional tissue - richly innervated & vascularized!). Funny that Americans insist circumcision has health benefits, when the USA represents such a poor example of that!
psandbergnz 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7: "...you're arguing against circumcision, generally speaking, while I'm only arguing for MALE circumcision, but not female." This actually undermines your own case. Since the issue is not severity, or degree of barbarity or measurable effects on sexual function, but human rights, the only difference that remains is the sex of the child, so your position is fundamentally sexist. Why the double standard? Why do boys deserve less protection against human rights abuse than girls?
Hugh7777 1 year ago 2
@Mrmoc7 "I contend that there is no legitimate reason to believe the quality of a child's life is diminished in anyway, " How exactly is it do you know this? Have you done a study wherein you had people with foreskins and could turn them on or off and have them tell you if it was different?
wdmm94 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7 Vaccinations themselves are a highly questionable procedure for anyone who has done any serious research on the subject. However, regardless of their efficacy they cannot and should not be compared with circumcision. Why? Because nothing is being taken. No body parts are being removed. There is no amputation here. No permanent physical damage is occuring.
endofscene 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7 "the argument that the 'chid's" body belongs to that child while it is still a child does not hold much water. " This claim would hold some weight if you could give the man his foreskin back when he turns 18. But you can't. What you do to the child, you do to the man, so that the man's human rights are abused when you do it to the child.
Hugh7777 1 year ago 3
@Mrmoc7 funny that such words as "ad-hominem" would come out of your mouth Mrmoc. . .afterall, weren't you the one calling someone an "idiot" and a "piece of shit?"
oopalonga 1 year ago
@oopalonga Ditto
wdmm94 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7 I have thought about the vaccine angle myself. Childhood vaccines have, for sure, saved millions of children and adults from death/injury and don't take away a part of their body forever.
wdmm94 1 year ago
@Mrmoc7 Edell is not an expert on the subject. And anytime that someone uses personal anecdotes to move you to a generalization, beware! Yes, as a medical practitioner, by today's standards, he's an idiot... a neanderthal in his approach. Today we use evidence based medicine to make decisions; and overwhelming evidence supports the use of circumcision in Africa. We don't make decisions because we've gone to Africa and talked to a few people about what they might do if they had a circumcision.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru The "research" consists solely of biased studies with insufficient sample spaces and poor execution. For example, the circumcised men were instructed to clean. What's more, they couldn't have sex for a while after their circumcision, artificially reducing that group's HIV transmission rate. Edell is just bringing some common sense into this issue: why do the regions with the highest circ rate also have the highest rate of AIDS, and vice versa?
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor "sample spaces" doesn't mean anything at all. You made that term up, which is silly because I'm a doctor and I read journal articles everyday... trust me, it's utter nonsense. Your comment is tantamount to a child's scribbling in crayon about a boogie man.
You're entitled to your opinion. But I recommend you do more reading and less emotive argument creating.
So supply a scholarly source that discusses what you're suggesting. Otherwise you're just a poor liar.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru Obviously you know nothing about statistics then.
If circumcision is such a viable prophylactic against HIV, then why do the US and Southern Africa have such high rates of HIV transmission and also such high rates of circumcision? Why does Europe, in which circumcision is almost never performed, have such a low rate of HIV?
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor So when was the last time you took a preventive medicine course? I took it in my 2nd yr of med school. One of us knows how to interpret a journal article. Now who might that be?
What is NNT? NNH? Odds ratio? Absolute risk? Oh, you don't know these terms? Sorry, let me dumb it down to your intellectual pay-grade:
Circ has only demonstrated prevention of HIV transmission in vaginal sex. In the US & Europe the majority of cases are homosexual. S. Africa is considering implementing circ
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru If you don't know what a sample space is, it's obvious you just googled some statistical buzzwords to sound smart.
If you look at the studies objectively, you'll see how flawed they are. The sample space in each of them is insufficient and have little in the way of variable control. The circumcised men were instructed to wash regularly and in addition were forced to abstain from sex to heal. Do you know what happens if measure one dependent variable with >1 independents?
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Looks like someone lost their sense of sarcasm in the ether. Get a grip on your uncircumcised self and try re-reading for humor.
A well design medical study has only one ind var. But confounders occur in virtually all medical studies. And since we're playing this cute little game, give three ways to adjust for these confounders.
If you're truly a man of science, name the papers and we'll discuss their respective protocols, otherwise you're purposely being vague and out of context.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru Let's skip the testing. I know the conditions of good experimental design and I'll assume you do as well.
There are a handfull of studies on circumcision and AIDS in Africa, but how about we start out with "Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Rakai, Uganda"? That and the one conducted in Kisumu Kenya are the two that were prematurely ended because the use of a control group was deemed "unethical" by the experiments' conductors.
By the way, I'm circumcised.
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor you're circumsized... TMI.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru Just thought I'd refute your assumption that I opposed circumcision because it had never been performed on me ("Get a grip on your uncircumcised self.") Most of the men opposing circumcision have been circumcised themselves.
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Again, read for sarcasm... they do have that in your neck of the woods, don't they? Or do you just get irony?
So, what's the problem, did they take a little too much off the top. It's not like a haircut... it wont grow back.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru Ok, let's start with Gray et al. Firstly, the circumcised men were told to abstain from sex for a minimum of six weeks. What about the HIV-positive circumcised men in the study? How can you expect reasonable results when in societies like Uganda, circumcised men can expect a "higher class" of sex partners? I'm not saying that we can expect a perfect study, but the conductors should have taken that into account when making the boastful "50%" claim.
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Did you read the study. Let me know if you need a copy. I can send you a pdf file.
Okay, so while they asked the circumcised men to abstain, it was only until wound healing was complete (~2 weeks). If you're arguing that the education (safe sex) is a confounder, you should know that the control group was also question about at risk behavior and both groups were given free condoms.
The "higher class" groups you're referring to, aka, confounders were adjusted using stratification.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru 6 weeks was advised for recovery, not 2. There were also 30 circumcised men who were HIV positive when they entered the trial. A man's partner isn't going to transmit HIV to him if he's already positive for the virus. What I meant by the claim was that saying circumcision reduces HIV transmission by 50 or 60% doesn't bother to mention that an intact man has a 2.4% chance of transmission versus 1.6% in a circumcised man. Another reason why a larger sample space is desirable
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor My bad, they don't actually quote an average recovery time. But surgical follow-up are done 24-48 hrs, 5-9 days, and 4-6 weeks. However, in infants the healing time is approx one week.
6461 men were screened, of those the ones who were HIV+ were eliminated from the study.
Sample Space: Where are you getting the 2.4 and the 1.6%? I'm not following how, even if these odd were true, divergent odds would require more possible outcomes? The two outcomes are prevention versus null.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru My bad too, upon further inspection. They suggest a recovery period of 6 weeks in the discussion of further research (even though they called the continuation of their own unethical). 2.4% is the approximate chance an uncut man has of receiving HIV from a positive partner during one sexual encounter. I'd like to see the raw data myself, but to the extent of my knowledge, it hasn't been made available. Technically, 2.4 is 150% of 1.6 but the statistic is still misleading.
Mystoksor 1 year ago 2
@Mystoksor I'm not following your use of these numbers. That was the point of the study, to determine the modified risk produced by circumcision. Those numbers are what is being derived in the study. And 2. 4 vs 1.6 is not cited in this study.
If you could cite your source for the numbers it would be enlightening.
I've got to run bro... thanks for the convo.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru I'll dig up those numbers. I'm confident that Gray or one of his colleagues on the "Rakai" study though I see it's not mentioned in the study itself.
Likewise, it's been a pleasure. I should probably get some work done myself >.>
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor "boastful "50%" claim"... That is not how science works. Like I said before studies such as these are rigorously peer reviewed by thousands of doctors and claims need to merited by the use of good analysis.
What you want to look at is the p-value and confidence interval to know if the percentage found in the study means anything
One does not need a 50% difference to claim success. If circumcision reduced the risk by 20% it could still be argued that it's a valuable preventive tool.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru All that said, I still respect the studies, at least as much as I respect the other studies conducted in the same region showing a higher rate of HIV contraction among circumcised men. And Edell does raise an interesting point: how are we going to implement this kind of treatment program when so many forms of humanitarian aid are underfunded or altogether unfeasible? The movement to circumcise men in Africa smacks of another civilizing mission in my humble opinion.
Mystoksor 1 year ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@Mystoksor "How can you expect reasonable results when in societies like Uganda, circumcised men can expect a "higher class" of sex partners?"
"Treatment assignment was randomly generated in blocks of 20, stratified on community, with each community receiving four blocks of 20 assignment envelopes" (Gray 1999)
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@Mystoksor "There are a handfull of studies on circumcision and AIDS in Africa, but how about we start out with "Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Rakai, Uganda"? That and the one conducted in Kisumu Kenya are the two that were prematurely ended because the use of a control group was deemed "unethical" by the experiments' conductors."
That is a certain text. What's your point?
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru So I couldn't remember the exact name of the study. Are you really going to go this crazy over the semantics? Do you actually want to debate or just fling insults?
Mystoksor 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Mystoksor "...debate or just fling insults?" Good question.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Can we do both (°_°)
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Seriously, you talking about one study you can't remember the name of, but you insist is flawed. And you're quoting it? You do know that all these studies are peer reviewed, don't you?
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@Mystoksor So do you want the insults first, or after, or interspersed. How about if we agree to rhyme the insults?
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Come on, how does one adjust for confounders? It rhymes with a Fender guitar, and it's not Telecaster.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@Mystoksor I'm sensing your white flag... (°_°) Thanks for playing.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@AllknowingGuitarGuru I'm also starting to appreciate how difficult it is to have a serious debate on youtube. So if you'd like, we could just go back to the insults. What better way to display to the world the sophistication of the circumcision & AIDS debates?
Mystoksor 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Let's not skip the pop quiz... it sounds like big fun.
And let's either talk about the protocols for the study or meta analysis I suggested, or you suggest one. This talking about these nameless "handful of studies" is unscholarly and a waste of time.
You either know your stuff or you don't. And if you don't have access to the journals, never fear. I have my institutional accounts with JAMA, Up-to-date, AIDS and many other journals.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
@Mystoksor Shall we start with the Weiss meta analysis? Or the Gray, Kiwanuka and Quinn; Male circumcision and HIV acquisition and transmission: cohort studies in Rakai, Uganda. AIDS. 2000 Oct 20?
I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time with someone who was trying to use an ecological study design to determine the efficacy of circumcision, ie, comparing countries.
But go ahead, give it your best shot.
However, cite specific deficiencies, because vagueness is for pseudo-intellects and sissies.
AllknowingGuitarGuru 1 year ago
Can I dumb something down for you? Lookup on how to catch any disease is through the urethra. what does foreskin have to do with it. All these Africa studies are lies.
TheYellowtulip 10 months ago 5
@AllknowingGuitarGuru
"Today we use evidence based medicine to make decisions" Why not SCIENCE based medicine?.. just because it is evidence, doesn't guarantee it is VALID evidence.
And with KNOWN flaws, it can hardly BE valid.
Tandykane 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dr. Dean Edell claims in this video that a study showed that providing men soap was as effective as medically performed male circumcision with counseling for HIV prevention. If this study in fact exists, please provide the reference for it so that I can read it. Also, the studies in Africa clearly showed that the net effect of MPCWC was to REDUCE total HIV transmission, contrary to his suggestion that it might be increased.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos Anyone who would slice off part of a child's genitals based on a study is sick. It will take a rational mind to understand this.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 8
@AIDSvideos You seem selectively knowledgeable on circumcision and HIV. Surprised you haven't heard about the finding viz hygiene and reduced risk of HIV infection. Aidsmap has reported on it. The citation is: O’Farrell N et al. Association between HIV and subpreputial penile wetness in uncircumcised men in South Africa. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 43: 69 – 77, 2006.
MCandHIV 1 year ago 2
@MCandHIV: *Thank you* for providing the full study reference. I read it. If this is the study that Dr. Edell was referring to, then he has misstated its results. Contrary to what he says in the video, this study did not show that an intervention of providing men in Africa with soap and fresh water achieved comparable HIV risk reductions to those achieved by MPCWC (50% reduction). It simply showed an association between penile wetness under the foreskin and rate of HIV infection.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos Authors conclude hygiene was compelling factor, suggest improved hygienic conditions as alternative to c. A synthesis of this & other studies drives the objective concl'n that as btwn altern.'s, circ is not the better choice + additional ben. in providing hygienic conditions. You no doubt are aware of the huge complication rates in c. (34%-42%). Male circ. for HIV prevention: a prospective study of complications in clinical and trad'al settings .... Bull. of WHO 86(9):669-677. 2008.
MCandHIV 1 year ago 2
@MCandHIV: I read that study. In it, the 35% complication rate was for TRADITIONAL circumcisions (which neither I nor WHO advocate); MPC had an adverse-event rate of 17.7%. Your point that current standards of practice for MPC in the field in Africa may not match the standards in the clinical trials, and that the risk of complications may be higher, is fair; that's an argument for improving the standards and conditions for performing MPCWC, not proof that MPCWC should be abandoned.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos My argument concerning complications is an argument to avoid circumcision as an alleged HIV prevention measure because reality has impinged on the grand plans of AIDS researchers and implementers over and over again. The marginal gain from circumcision will be and is being offset by losses to disinhibition and complications. Anything else is wishful thinking. Prevention that works without side effects are well known: education, condoms, reduce concurrent partners.
MCandHIV 1 year ago
@MCandHIV: As same study noted: "That circumcision can be performed safely on young adults in clinical settings in Africa has been shown in Kisumu, Kenya, and in Orange Farm, South Africa, where the rates of adverse events were 1.7% and 3.6%, respectively, and most of these were mild. However, these were in the highly monitored and well-equipped contexts of clinical trials." MPCWC *can* be done safely and effectively. Doing this at scale won't be easy but there's no evidence it's impossible.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos "Can be" has been a rallying cry for the AIDS industry for two decades now. However, the track record of implementing anything other than effective but less glamorous prevention programs has been poor to disastrous. Circumcision will produce death and suffering. Mass circumcision is inviting catastrophe. The implementers are denialist on this fact or simply won't address the issue for fear of losing their funding.
MCandHIV 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Bonobo3D: As is typical of radical anti-circumcision activists, when someone presents the scientific evidence for medically performed circumcision of adults with counseling, you immediately and falsely accuse them of advocating infant circumcision. Circumcision of consenting adults and circumcision of infants are SEPARATE ISSUES. Only radical anti-circumcision activists are incapable of (or unwilling to) distinguish them.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos Indeed circumcision of consenting adults and forcing circumcision upon infants and children who cannot understand or consent have different ethical and legal implications. So far all of the circumcision being pushed on Africa to "prevent AIDS" has made no such distinction. Quack doctors like Becky Kuhn and phoneys like Stephen Lewis expose themselves as unwilling to consider the human rights of children in their zeal to force circumcision upon everyone.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Bonobo3D: I should point out that Dr. Kuhn is a licensed medical doctor and your calling her a "quack" is libel. You should be more cautious in throwing around labels like that. Your claim that the promotion of MPCWC for male adults in Africa has failed to distinguish between adult and infant circumcision is also false. UNAIDS press releases on this topic clearly discussed medically performed circumcision with counseling for adults, not circumcision of infants.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos Perhaps I should have said that she appears to be quack like in the same way John Harvey Kellogg appeared to be. The history of circumcision is full of quack like behaviour on the part of so called doctors.
As soon as the press release went out opportunists like Neil Pollock was in Rwanda cutting babies, "saving lives." He never showed interest in HIV medicine before that. His specialty is male genial mutilation of infant boys. The 140 year history of medial fraud continues.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Many of Dr. Dean Edell's statements here about medically performed circumcision of with counseling (MPCWC) are misleading or are irrelevant and are contradicted by the findings of published, peer-reviewed scientific studies. Three separate studies *in Africa* have shown that MPCWC is safe and effective for reducing the rate of HIV infections through heterosexual sex among men who are circumcised. The net number of HIV infections was reduced BY HALF versus control subjects.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos Education about safe sex prevents HIV infection.
Lopping off the most sexually sensate part of a penis for specious prophylactic excuses; touting genital mutilation as a "safe and effective method" for preventing anything and everything has a 140 year history of medical quackery and fraud. This is an issue of human rights. Genital integrity vs medical fraud.
Dr. Dean Edell has a keen grasp of this issue. I suggest you listen carefully to the points he makes in this video again.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Bonobo3D: As is typical of radical anti-circumcision activists, you wrongly assume that those who disagree with you do not understand your arguments. I listened to this video twice. The problem is not that I do not understand Dr. Edell's statements. The problem is that his claim that MPCWC may increase HIV transmission contradicts the findings of all three published peer-reviewed scientific studies of the effectiveness of MPCWC for HIV prevention in Africa. He is wrong.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos You are wrong. Edell has been very clear in pointing out all of the weaknesses with your so-called studies.
As a human being who believes in the rights of all children to genital integrity I'm very aware that some "who disagree with me" may not understand or believe that children have this basic human right. That's about as simple as I can make it for you. Thankfully other countries are starting to speak up.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Bonobo3D: Dr. Edell speculates about hypothetical scenarios that MIGHT happen if adult men are circumcised with counseling. The published, peer-reviewed scientific studies show what DOES IN FACT HAPPEN, contradicting the fears he raises in his speculation.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos The problems w/ the African RCTs are largely rooted in researcher and self-reporting bias. Both are exaggerated in the RCT context bec. the researchers were all and continue to be circumcision advocates from the beginning of their careers and all the men were volunteers seeking circumcision first and a method to deal with HIV risk a distant second. The high drop out rates in follow-up indicate those who seroconverted lost interest or ability to continue, thereby skewing the results.
MCandHIV 1 year ago 3
@MCandHIV: There is no researcher or self-reporting bias in the results of HIV tests, which were used to measure the actual HIV infection rates among the test (MPCWC) and control (counseling) subjects. The 3 studies all passed independent peer review and no evidence of bias that would influence the results was found. There's no evidence that selective drop-out rates invalidate the results or even call them in to question. You are simply denying the research findings because you don't like them.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos The researcher bias is in the interpretation and wild extrapolition of the results. Many disagree with you that self report and drop out affect valid conclusions of the studies. Peer review does not end the discussion or make the studies unassailable. The analysis continues. You should join it by looking at the raw data. You clearly like the idea of circumcision. But that doesn't make criticism any less valid just because you're in the camp that supports the practice.
MCandHIV 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos Why is it "radical" to support and work for the human rights of all children to genital integrity? Your comment reveals prejudice against normal genitals, the primary motivation for genital mutilation of children is this prejudice you show.
RoseFink 1 year ago 4
@RoseFink: I'm not saying that all people who oppose infant circumcision are radicals by any means. The "radicals" are people who: (1) immediately accuse anyone who cites the scientific evidence for MPCWC of adults of also supporting infant circumcision, which is a separate issue and practice; (2) deny the scientific evidence of safety and effectiveness of MPCWC for HIV prevention as shown by three trials in Africa; (3) seem to be highly emotional and incapable of discussing this rationally.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos History has repeatedly shown that those with an agenda to promote circumcision make no distinction whatsoever between consenting adults choosing circumcision and forcing it upon infants and children. In fact all of the psychotically sick adults who use their medical credentials to promote genital mutilation of children purposely ignore human rights of children to profit from this insanity.
Bonobo3D 1 year ago 2
@RoseFink: I do not oppose those who argue against infant circumcision. My comments about MPCWC do not show "prejudice against normal genitals." They show that I've read the studies about MPCWC and HIV prevention in Africa and understand the results. To be clear, to the extent I have an opinion at all, I probably oppose infant circumcision as an elective medical procedure, with risks, without benefit I know before sexual debut, which the child could decide for themselves about later.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos Your opinion on the matter is not ipso facto evidence that you have read the studies and understand them. It shows you accept the conclusions of the authors of the studies. Others of course may draw different conclusions than you from the raw data, and/or consider additional factors not considered by the authors.
MCandHIV 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos You can't deny the controversy. The fact many question the ethics of imposing circumcision by raising false or unrealistic expectations therefrom creates a practical complication that requires consideration in any decision to promote it. Even the authors of the studies concede it's a number game. Not enough uptake or too much risk disinhibition, and it's worse than a wash due to the complication and death rates common in resource poor settings + higher HIV rates from disinhibition.
MCandHIV 1 year ago
@MCandHIV: The existence of "controversy" proves nothing. There is "controversy" about the theory of evolution, but that doesn't mean there's any question about what the scientific evidence shows. Your statement that MPCWC is "worse than a wash" is simply false. The studies clearly showed that the ACTUAL rate of HIV infection (not self-report, but as shown by test) was reduced by 50%. If any disinhibition occurred, the protective effect of MPCWC more than compensated for it.
AIDSvideos 1 year ago
@AIDSvideos The assertion that the results are worse than a wash is prospective prediction based on the shortcomings of the studies and evidence in countries that circumcise and see rates of HIV similar or higher in circumcised men. It is in the interpretation of the data prospectively that matters, not the clinical outcomes because the clinical conditions are unlikely to be repeated in the real world. If you were open minded and not already sold on circ, you would know these criticisms already.
MCandHIV 1 year ago