Funny how doctors like this bitch don't have a clue, you don't retract the foreskin. sure she's pro circ it's her bread and butter. My ex girlfriends dad is a doctor and I was shocked on how cheap he was, but so so rich and greedy at the same time. Trust me I can tell she is the same way.
You shouldn't retract a babies foreskin anyway!!!! The only person who should retract it is the boy it belongs too! What a pleb! She needs to educate herself on intact care!She never even mentioned the 100+ babies that die every year from it. they fell asleep because they went into shock!!!! That tiny piece of foreskin contains almost 3x the amount of nerve endings than a clitoris! Wonder how she'd feel is someone cut her clitoris off!
You shouldn't retract a babies foreskin anyway!!!! The only person who should retract it is the boy it belongs too! What a pleb! She needs to educate herself on intact care!She never even mentioned the 100+ babies that die every year from it. they fell asleep because they went into shock!!!!
How fucking idiotic is this pediatrician. Just a "little bit of foreskin"? The baby's entire penis is tiny, he's a BABY! And the babies aren't falling asleep, they are in SHOCK! Who falls asleep while part of their penis is being AMPUTATED?! *headdesk*
They aren't falling asleep! They're going into shock! Take 20 minutes out of your day and research the truth and you'll realize how brainwashed/in denial the country is.
This video really tells something about this "Doctor"
Quoting her saying " It's really hard to pull the skin back during that first year"
A childs penis should NEVER be retracted at that age! That is why so many children develop problems is because doctors encourage parents to retract when the prepuce is fused to the glans! AWFUL and MISGUIDED advice.
Appauling that someone medically trained could be so MISINFORMED and allowed to speak publicly on TV!
the doctor forgot to mention the obvious fact that your removing hundreds of thousands of nerves :( . I have a cousin and my sisters boyfriend got circumcised when they joined the army. They both said sex is good but it felt a whole lot better before they lost their foreskins.
The clitoral hood is a smaller piece of skin. Removing it would cause similar or even less pain. Why is this female-equivalent of male circumcision illegal by US 1996 federal law? Why are there more laws governing tattoos on infants and minors than penis sculpting?
Dr Mendenhall: FDA statement on 8/29/00 "This letter is to alert you to the potential for injury from two commonly used circumcision clamps, the Gomco®/gomco-type and Mogen®/mogen-type clamps. Both are widely used during circumcision to remove the foreskin while protecting the glans penis...We received 105 reports of injuries involving circumcision clamps between July 1996 and January 2000. These have included laceration, hemorrhage, penile amputation, and urethral damage"
April 15, 2009 Northwestern Memorial Hospital obstetrician is being sued for botching a circumcision and cutting off a portion of the infant's penis. The suit, filed by David Burden on behalf of his son Daniel Burden, claims that on Oct. 5, 2007, one day after Daniel was born, Dr. Marc Feldstein performed a circumcision on the boy. However, rather than removing only the foreskin, the doctor cut and removed a portion of the baby's penis.
July 19 2010 Atlanta Journal. Maker of the Mogen circumcision clamp is sued and the Court awarded a 10.8 million dollar judgement. The infant lost the entire glans of his penis. Mogen has claimed that it is impossible to damage the penis when using their circumcision tool. Mogen was also sued when use of their device resulted in an infant boy loosing 1/3 of his glans in 2009. Mogen is already in default on a $7.5 million judgement from 2007
Dr. Mendenhall--shame on you. How many times have you seen some one go into a trance or siezure like state due to PTSD? As a doctor you should know how the body reacts to pain and trauma. Also, unless you performed brain wave analysis you can not prove that the baby was asleep.
Also, the whole idea of two "professional" women smiling this much while talking about foreceably amputating parts of the genitalia of male infants is perversely disturbing. It is bobbitesque
Dr Mendenhall: You are deceiving the public. Be honest about the number of infant fatalites due to infant circumcision. 100-200 or more baby boys die from the effects of circumcision in the US each year. Second be honest about how much a circumcision costs and how much profit infant brings to your practice per year. The amount of empahsis the medical community puts on circumcising infant boys is directly proportional to the amount of money that they are allowed to charge for the proceedure
3. As infant boys do not have sex, why does HIV/STD transmission even matter. Circumcision can be performed at any time once the boy is able to make decisions for himself if STD/HIV transmission is a concern. Lets not forget, that safe sex is more effective in preventing STD/AIDs that foreskin amputation as well.
4. Prevents phimosis and infections. US doctors falsely diagnose phimosis on a regular basis. At birth the foreskin is FUSED to the glans & seperates gradualy as the child ages.
1. Infant girls get UTI's four times more often than do infant boys-yet we dont modify the genitals of infant girls
2. As the clitoris is analogous to the penis and the foreskin is analgous to the clitoral hood, and given that blood, urine, dead cells, bacteria, fungus, smegma and femine hygiene product debris get traped under the clitoral hood and parts of the inner labia, it logically follows that removing the clitoral hood and trimming the inner labia would also reduce cancer.
Attention Dr. Mendenhall & Ms Chee. July 18 Lancet --Circumcision doesn't reduce transmission of HIV from infected men to women, says a study that included 922 HIV-infected men in Uganda. Dr. Maria Wawer of Johns Hopkins
"Circumcision of HIV-infected men DID NOT reduce HIV transmission to female partners over 24 months; longer-term effects could not be assessed. Condom use after male circumcision is essential for HIV prevention," The study was stopped early due to "futility"
Mosby's Pediatric Advisor "Urinary tract infections are fairly common in children. About 2% of boys and 8% of girls will have a urinary infection during their childhood". As girls are 4 times more likely to have a UTI during their childhood than boys, why is this medical fact not used to justify surgically altering the female baby's genitalia at birth without her consent? In addition Clitoral phimosis was identified in 22% of the women seeking treatment at a sexual dysfunction clinic.
Dr Mendenhall cont: then after applying a topical analgesic you make two incisions and remove the foreskin. What happens when the topical analgesic wears off? Also your comments are in direct conflict with the ever growing research that shows that infants are often adversly affected by trauma. Also, how do you morally and ethically justify surgicaly altering a baby boys genitalia without his consent? What about the feminist mantra-my body my decision?
Dr Mendenhall cont: in nations where modern plumbing, soap, and potable water are easily available, with a litte education, hygiene becomes a non issue. Baby girls are also at risk of clitoral adhesions, so why not cut of their clitoral hood?
Your claim that the baby's sleep is perposterous. The baby boy has to deal with the trauma of being forceably strapped to a table by people three times his size, and then have his foreskin which is by nature adhered to the glans forceably separated
Dr. Mendenhall: UTI's are far more common in baby girls than they are in boys due to the shortness of the urethra and proximity of the urethra opening to the anus. Do you advocate surgically altering baby girls to lessen UTI's in baby girls? Second, penile cancer is very rare. However, to use your logic, we should remove a baby girls breasts at birth to lessen the risk of breast cancer when the baby grows to adulthood, and breast cancer is far more prevalent that penile cancer
UTI's in men are rare due to the length of the urethra. Circumcised or not does not effect that, and the claim is ridiulous. Out of 35 British relatives age 17- 79, not one of my family member has heard of a boy getting a UTI.
@Fletch6 The only reason the rate has dropped in the west is that 67% of babies born are wetbacks and they do not circumcise. Time to move to the NE where there are more white people!
I've seen studies where they circumcised babies while under MRI observations. The brain showed signs of serious trauma, shock, and semi coma. Some of the changes made to the brain were permanent! They've also done blood tests, which showed the babies stress hormones were still highly elevated months after the surgery...
This dr is apparently very unaware, she said that UTI's and things were caused because it's hard to pull back the foreskin and keep them clean during the first year, you don't retract the foreskin. I'm so sick of Dr's and websites and television shows putting out false and incorrect information. Why don't you know your facts before handing them out to others.
This dr is apparently very unaware, she said that UTI's and things were caused because it's hard to pull back the foreskin and keep them clean you don't retract the foreskin. I'm so sick of Dr's and websites and television shows putting out false and incorrect information. Why don't you know your facts before handing them out to others.
It is important to remember that parents in America are confused when it comes to caring for an intact child. UTI's or other problems could come from improper cleaning, forced retraction, etc. Treat intact boys as intact girls! Wipe the outside and bath regularly. That's all! No pulling, peeling, or anything! My mother lived in England for 30 years where everyone is intact and never heard of a boy getting a UTI.
just because its circumcised doesn't necessarily mean its cleaner. a circumcised guy may not keep his clean while an uncircumcised guy may be a generally cleaner guy
@captainbryce1 my son fell asleep during his, just for the record. This isn't even an issue, it's the parents decision. Find me a newborn that can make it's own smart decisions and maybe I'll change my mind, oh right, you can't, because no newborn can. And I did it for my sons sake, because every guy I know that isn't circumcised, got picked on a lot back in high school, and had a lot of UTI's.
"every guy I know that isn't circumcised [...] had a lot of UTI's.""
Stop that, it's so OBVIOUSLY made up that it's pathetic, circumcision prevents UTI only during the FIRST YEAR of life, learn your facts before trying to BS people.
And seriously how could anyone believe that all uncut guys you know had "lot of UTIs" AND told you about it? Or do you know ONE uncut guy?
You're just ridiculing yourself and pro-circ (but they do not need you to be ridicule)
If your anecdote was any relevant, Europe would be plagged with UTIs. I have never heard anything on TV or from medical authorities, like "look at that big public health issue we have in Europe, nothing like that in USA thanks to circumcision!"
Why? Beacause every single "benefit" claimed for circumcision is either awfull exageration or plain BS.
Give me ONE reason why I should be allowed to remove my son's foreskin and not his toenails (some sportsmen do it, toenails are only good to hurt, be dirty and infected)
Funny that diminished risk of getting STDs is used as an argument for INFANT circumcision. Are they afraid their toddler is going to have unprotected sex? When he get old enough to have sex, he at least have a word to say about how he wants his body.
If at age 15 someone had told me, hey if I remove that piece of your penis you will be very partially protected if you have unsafe sex, honestly I would have thought this guy is a retard.
@Fletch6 The only reason it is down here in CA is all the damn Mexicans! Mexicans make up 66% of births.....wihite only 17%! Whites are still circumcising at a 87% rate (CDC). I was cut at 18 andnow have 3 circumcised son's (5,3,1) and can assure you it is far superior to be cut!
@Fletch6 Just go to the CDC site and it is spelled out right there that the only reason the rates in the west are down is because of the large hispanic baby boom......actual breeding program for Aztlan (google it). We need to change the 14th Ammendment and drive these animals south!
Normal white Americans still circumcise, only a handful are not. I would bet you are not even circumcised! You can always move to MExico where they like there burritos with lots of cheese......LMAO!
@sjbeacher I'm not mexican, I'm live in California and I'm not circumcised. And most of the people I know that are having/had boys in the last 3 or 4 years haven't had them circumcised either (they are white). So I agree that the rate is falling across the board (and not just because of "the Mexicans" you fucking racist). Anyways, the rate nationwide has also fallen in the last 10 years to between 55 and 57% (accounting for all races/ethnicities). Wake up, there's just is no point to it anymore!
@captainbryce1 Who cares about other races! According to the CDC 87% of white boys are still being circumcised. Come on are you really happy with a doggy dick? Where you born in the USA? All our family and extended family all have circumcised their boy's! It is revolting why anyone would want their kid to run around like that! If I had a daughter she would be taught that uncut guys spread disease and to stay away from them! It is cleaner, healthier, better looking and improves sex!
@sjbeacher "who cares about other races" - that would be the people who are not RACIST DOUCHBAGS! Congratulations for being circumcised. You probably never had a choice in the matter. How can cutting parts off "improve" anything. If you take a shower everyday cleanliness isn't a factor. And yes, I'm very happy I got to keep all the parts I was born with. I still have all my nerve endings and won't have to worry about losing sensitivity. Circumcision is mutilation plain and simple!
@captainbryce1 I was circumcised at 18 and never regreted it (31 now) and had no hesitation to have my son's circumcised. You have an issue with being the odd man out! Thats why you are against circumcision and are not even circumcised! Circumcised is far superior, no mutilation or loss of sexual sensitivity.....thats all anti BULLSHIT!
@sjbeacher You chose to be circumcised. GOOD FOR YOU! (if I even believe your story) you had that choice to do that. I also had that choice and chose NOT to. Your argument is illogical. Why would I have an "odd man out" issue when I can always make a choice in the matter? I'm against circumcision because I think EVERYBODY should have the right to make that choice. It's that simple. And there have been plenty of other people that DO lose sensitivity after being cut. You don't represent everyone.
@sjbeacher Oh, by the way, I just checked up on your "stats". Turns out the rate of circumcision today (all races) in the US was down to 55% in 2003. Since hispanics only make up 15% of the population, how do you explain the rate being so low? Even if EVERY hispanic in the US was intact, the rate should still be much higher (according to you) if 87% of whites were still doing it. Whites make up 80% of the population. The latest CDC stats on circumcision are from 1999 (11 YEARS AGO). Nice try!
@captainbryce1 Considering the wetbacks have the greatest birth rates it is easy to see......doesn't matter of the population, but it matters of the birth rate! Births in California are 67% hispanic (wetbacks), 17% white and the remaining either Asian or Black!
I would bet you are European born and came here without a clue! Uncircumcised is nasty and disgusting! As my wife and her friends say, they have a Mexican's Dick! No self respecting white American female would have sex with an uncut guy
@sjbeacher I'm not even going to attempt to have a rational debate with an ignorant racist. The fact that you are so ignorant in one facet of life only proves that you are an ignorant person all around, so your ignorance regarding circumcision doesn't surprise me. You clearly have bigger issues that you need to work out and I really feel sorry that white Americans that have YOU to give them such a bad name. This is why everyone thinks that white people are racist, BECAUSE OF YOU! Congratulations
@sjbeacher Oh, and lastly, this is simple math. If only 15% of the US population is hispanic and 80% is white and only 55% of people are having their sons circumcised, then its obviously much more than the hispanics that are causing the decline. People are more educated now and have access to more information regarding circumcision than they did before. Pediatricians don't recommend it anymore and there are no real benefits to doing it beyond tradition. THE END!
@captainbryce1 Dude, officially wetbacks are 18% and quickly growing. Their birth rate is like that of rabbits and these animals do not circumcise, that is the only reason the circ rate is down. Also, my boys are circumcised and don't count on the official count as the go by hospital discharge records! Their doctor only circumcises in his office after discharge......Go figure and he has a 100% circ rate of his delivered males!
@sjbeacher Dude you are either a liar making a bunch of shit up or just completely ignorant of facts because nothing you are saing is true. The NY times just a few days ago announced as reported by the CDC that the rate of US circumcision is down AGAIN to just 33% in the last 3 years (2006-2009), LOOK IT UP! So much for your entire bullshit racist argument! I feel sorry for your boys by the way. Hopefully they'll evolve past you one day, but the apple usually doesn't fall very far from the tree!
@captainbryce1 Dipshit do you know how they got 33%? Circumcisions that were done in the hospital and paid by insurance. So, as my boys were all circumcised at the doctors office they don't count, any circumcision that the parents paid for, not counted.....It is a Bullshit Propoganda from the anti circ dweebs! So, pull your head out of your ass, circumcision is alive and well! Did you read about Canada doing a "U" turn on their circ policy?
@sjbeacher DIPSHIT most boys that are circumcised are done so before they are discharged from the hospital within the first 2 days of birth! Hardly ANYBODY ever does it after that (unless they are Jewish or crazy)! Anyways, you lost the argument before you even started. Your own source contradicted you LIAR. But whatever you need to tell yourself to feel good about your mutilated dick I guess! Goodbye dumbass...
@videocircus LOL, it's a good thing this isn't really a "fact". It's also a good thing that such a stat (even if "factual") wouldn't really mean anything whatsoever as it pertains to the value of routine infant circumcision, which is nill. Nice try though! I love how the pro-circ movement is actually the ones who are freaking out about the fact that circumcision rates have dropped steadily every decaded (even in the pro-circ US), lol.
@hippimummy "Kidding herself", she flat out lied numerous times. She has extreme difficulty in answering direct questions. "What's the trend?" - Instead of answering the question, she relates it to ethnicity. Then when pressed harder, she says there is a "slight" trend. LIE! 85% down to 57% MAJOR trend down! UTI's? First she gets "confused" on her numbers, then doesn't mention the insignificance of ONLY 1 out of 100 uncircumcised boys getting a UTI!
@hippimummy She also doesn't mention how ridiculously low the chances are of aquiring penis "cancer", "adhesions" or "infections of the foreskin". OMG! These things must be a serious concern and very common! Oh, but she goes out of her way to tell us how small the chances are of any complications are. What's funny is that they are about the same as the chances of problems "cured" by circumcision, which is why the AAP says that the benefits do not outweight the risks. Surprise!
@hippimummy She doesn't think it's mutilation. Of course not, she performs them! But the dictionary definition of mutilation disagrees with her. And of course her response is to compare it to female circumcision (which nobody was even talking about). Just because one form of mutilation is worse than the other, doesn't make male circumcision NOT mutilation! Oh and I love how then NEVER mention any possible sexual side effects from it. Lol, babies go to sleep during circumcision my ass!
just a "small removal of a tiny piece of foreskin"??!! such a joke how they never mention in the cons that circumcision removes 3/4 of the pleasure receptive nerve endings, most of which are more complex than anywhere else on the penis. the foreskin is the primary erogenous zone on a male's body. taking away 3/4 of a male's sexual pleasure over his whole lifetime is one of the most brutal forms of mutilation in existence. it's child abuse and rape.
@fruitybud420 There is no loss of sexual sensitivity from circumcision, the foreskin only detracts from great sex! I was cut at 18 and can assure you it is far superior than having a doggy dick!
THEY DONT recommend it anymore because the insurance companies dont pay for it anymore. Parents should know better than performing sexual mutilation on a child, if you keep your body clean you shouldn't have a problem.
STIs are also controlled because there is a protein in the foreskin which kills certin STIs
COMPLICATIONS - the frenulum is the most sensitive part of the penis & is removed with Circumcision, replaced by scar tissue
OVER FIFTY PERCENT OF CIRCUMCISED MALES BECOME IMPOTENT
one in a hundred sounds pretty rare no wonder aap is neutral claiming no medical benefits. those who do it for religious reasons add "also health" what a dirty trick. besides the son should choose which medical view. an infant is not given the choice be prochoice!
BJU International 99 (4), 864-869 (British Journal of Urology International,
Volume 99 Issue 4 Page 864 - April 2007)
Circumcision removes the most sensitive part of a man's penis. The five most sensitive areas of the penis are on the foreskin. The transitional region from the external to the internal foreskin is the most sensitive region of the uncircumcised penis and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis.
Circumcision never needs to be done!! don't let these greedy brain-washing medical people lie to you!! This is proven true-logic... Animal circumcision is 100% unnecessary, Female circumcision is 100% unnecessary, and MALE CIRCUMCISION HAS SECRETLY ALWAYS BEEN 100% unnecessary!!! Animals, Females and off course males are born with PHIMOSIS!! Animals have foreskin, females have foreskin (clitoral hood), and males off course have foreskin!! Foreskin is not just a male thing!!
This video is lamentable. Mendenhall has done many circs and is blind to the problems they can cause. Many doctors still do not use proper pain management. You would never know from hearing her that the rate in the Pacific states is about 25% and falling. San Diego cannot possibly mirror "national trends." All of CA is ahead of the curve.
Circ ablates the most sensitive parts of the penis. Some circs result in a sexually damaged penis, especially after age 40 or 50.
The doctor is pretty ignorant on the data. UTIs are easily treatable with $30 of antibiotics. Adhesions only occur in circumcised infants. Complications runs up to 9%.
This is gentle, subtile, propaganda, but it is propaganda! They would give sugar to the BabyBoy in order to ease his pain, how funny is that? Give the sugar to the monkeys :-(((
And instead, talk about human rights and the freedom of choice... well understood the freedom of choice for the very owner of the male member!
Funny how doctors like this bitch don't have a clue, you don't retract the foreskin. sure she's pro circ it's her bread and butter. My ex girlfriends dad is a doctor and I was shocked on how cheap he was, but so so rich and greedy at the same time. Trust me I can tell she is the same way.
rud494 1 week ago
You shouldn't retract a babies foreskin anyway!!!! The only person who should retract it is the boy it belongs too! What a pleb! She needs to educate herself on intact care!She never even mentioned the 100+ babies that die every year from it. they fell asleep because they went into shock!!!! That tiny piece of foreskin contains almost 3x the amount of nerve endings than a clitoris! Wonder how she'd feel is someone cut her clitoris off!
GayleM82 4 months ago
You shouldn't retract a babies foreskin anyway!!!! The only person who should retract it is the boy it belongs too! What a pleb! She needs to educate herself on intact care!She never even mentioned the 100+ babies that die every year from it. they fell asleep because they went into shock!!!!
GayleM82 4 months ago
How fucking idiotic is this pediatrician. Just a "little bit of foreskin"? The baby's entire penis is tiny, he's a BABY! And the babies aren't falling asleep, they are in SHOCK! Who falls asleep while part of their penis is being AMPUTATED?! *headdesk*
parkwoodlounge 4 months ago
They aren't falling asleep! They're going into shock! Take 20 minutes out of your day and research the truth and you'll realize how brainwashed/in denial the country is.
DurangosMama 4 months ago
This video really tells something about this "Doctor"
Quoting her saying " It's really hard to pull the skin back during that first year"
A childs penis should NEVER be retracted at that age! That is why so many children develop problems is because doctors encourage parents to retract when the prepuce is fused to the glans! AWFUL and MISGUIDED advice.
Appauling that someone medically trained could be so MISINFORMED and allowed to speak publicly on TV!
TheChallenger2011 4 months ago
the doctor forgot to mention the obvious fact that your removing hundreds of thousands of nerves :( . I have a cousin and my sisters boyfriend got circumcised when they joined the army. They both said sex is good but it felt a whole lot better before they lost their foreskins.
s8nsK405 7 months ago
The clitoral hood is a smaller piece of skin. Removing it would cause similar or even less pain. Why is this female-equivalent of male circumcision illegal by US 1996 federal law? Why are there more laws governing tattoos on infants and minors than penis sculpting?
feministsAreCorrupt 8 months ago
If female clitoral hoods were removed on a mass scale on US girls, would that be genital mutilation?
feministsAreCorrupt 8 months ago
@feministsAreCorrupt Of cours it is.
Nifrayu 7 months ago
Hard to pull it back and clean it in the first year? No no. That is how a young foreskin is damaged.
feministsAreCorrupt 8 months ago 2
Dr Mendenhall: FDA statement on 8/29/00 "This letter is to alert you to the potential for injury from two commonly used circumcision clamps, the Gomco®/gomco-type and Mogen®/mogen-type clamps. Both are widely used during circumcision to remove the foreskin while protecting the glans penis...We received 105 reports of injuries involving circumcision clamps between July 1996 and January 2000. These have included laceration, hemorrhage, penile amputation, and urethral damage"
neechee5150 1 year ago
Minimal risk?????????
April 15, 2009 Northwestern Memorial Hospital obstetrician is being sued for botching a circumcision and cutting off a portion of the infant's penis. The suit, filed by David Burden on behalf of his son Daniel Burden, claims that on Oct. 5, 2007, one day after Daniel was born, Dr. Marc Feldstein performed a circumcision on the boy. However, rather than removing only the foreskin, the doctor cut and removed a portion of the baby's penis.
neechee5150 1 year ago
July 19 2010 Atlanta Journal. Maker of the Mogen circumcision clamp is sued and the Court awarded a 10.8 million dollar judgement. The infant lost the entire glans of his penis. Mogen has claimed that it is impossible to damage the penis when using their circumcision tool. Mogen was also sued when use of their device resulted in an infant boy loosing 1/3 of his glans in 2009. Mogen is already in default on a $7.5 million judgement from 2007
neechee5150 1 year ago
Dr. Mendenhall--shame on you. How many times have you seen some one go into a trance or siezure like state due to PTSD? As a doctor you should know how the body reacts to pain and trauma. Also, unless you performed brain wave analysis you can not prove that the baby was asleep.
Also, the whole idea of two "professional" women smiling this much while talking about foreceably amputating parts of the genitalia of male infants is perversely disturbing. It is bobbitesque
neechee5150 1 year ago 2
Dr Mendenhall: You are deceiving the public. Be honest about the number of infant fatalites due to infant circumcision. 100-200 or more baby boys die from the effects of circumcision in the US each year. Second be honest about how much a circumcision costs and how much profit infant brings to your practice per year. The amount of empahsis the medical community puts on circumcising infant boys is directly proportional to the amount of money that they are allowed to charge for the proceedure
neechee5150 1 year ago
3. As infant boys do not have sex, why does HIV/STD transmission even matter. Circumcision can be performed at any time once the boy is able to make decisions for himself if STD/HIV transmission is a concern. Lets not forget, that safe sex is more effective in preventing STD/AIDs that foreskin amputation as well.
4. Prevents phimosis and infections. US doctors falsely diagnose phimosis on a regular basis. At birth the foreskin is FUSED to the glans & seperates gradualy as the child ages.
neechee5150 1 year ago
1. Infant girls get UTI's four times more often than do infant boys-yet we dont modify the genitals of infant girls
2. As the clitoris is analogous to the penis and the foreskin is analgous to the clitoral hood, and given that blood, urine, dead cells, bacteria, fungus, smegma and femine hygiene product debris get traped under the clitoral hood and parts of the inner labia, it logically follows that removing the clitoral hood and trimming the inner labia would also reduce cancer.
neechee5150 1 year ago 2
Attention Dr. Mendenhall & Ms Chee. July 18 Lancet --Circumcision doesn't reduce transmission of HIV from infected men to women, says a study that included 922 HIV-infected men in Uganda. Dr. Maria Wawer of Johns Hopkins
"Circumcision of HIV-infected men DID NOT reduce HIV transmission to female partners over 24 months; longer-term effects could not be assessed. Condom use after male circumcision is essential for HIV prevention," The study was stopped early due to "futility"
neechee5150 1 year ago
@neechee5150
Johns Hopkins University staff concludes that condoms/sexual practices are the main factors HIV
transmission. They conclude that
circumcision makes no difference in HIV transmission, even in Africa.
LEVELS AND SPREAD OF HIV SEROPREVALENCE AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS (2009)
p.109 states that in 18 African countries and India, 10 showed more and 8 showed less HIV infection among circumcised men.
feministsAreCorrupt 8 months ago
Mosby's Pediatric Advisor "Urinary tract infections are fairly common in children. About 2% of boys and 8% of girls will have a urinary infection during their childhood". As girls are 4 times more likely to have a UTI during their childhood than boys, why is this medical fact not used to justify surgically altering the female baby's genitalia at birth without her consent? In addition Clitoral phimosis was identified in 22% of the women seeking treatment at a sexual dysfunction clinic.
neechee5150 1 year ago
Dr Mendenhall cont: then after applying a topical analgesic you make two incisions and remove the foreskin. What happens when the topical analgesic wears off? Also your comments are in direct conflict with the ever growing research that shows that infants are often adversly affected by trauma. Also, how do you morally and ethically justify surgicaly altering a baby boys genitalia without his consent? What about the feminist mantra-my body my decision?
neechee5150 1 year ago
Dr Mendenhall cont: in nations where modern plumbing, soap, and potable water are easily available, with a litte education, hygiene becomes a non issue. Baby girls are also at risk of clitoral adhesions, so why not cut of their clitoral hood?
Your claim that the baby's sleep is perposterous. The baby boy has to deal with the trauma of being forceably strapped to a table by people three times his size, and then have his foreskin which is by nature adhered to the glans forceably separated
neechee5150 1 year ago
Dr. Mendenhall: UTI's are far more common in baby girls than they are in boys due to the shortness of the urethra and proximity of the urethra opening to the anus. Do you advocate surgically altering baby girls to lessen UTI's in baby girls? Second, penile cancer is very rare. However, to use your logic, we should remove a baby girls breasts at birth to lessen the risk of breast cancer when the baby grows to adulthood, and breast cancer is far more prevalent that penile cancer
neechee5150 1 year ago
UTI's in men are rare due to the length of the urethra. Circumcised or not does not effect that, and the claim is ridiulous. Out of 35 British relatives age 17- 79, not one of my family member has heard of a boy getting a UTI.
michellemabelle123 1 year ago
I was born and raised in America. My mother is British thanks.
michellemabelle123 1 year ago
@Fletch6 The only reason the rate has dropped in the west is that 67% of babies born are wetbacks and they do not circumcise. Time to move to the NE where there are more white people!
friedforeskins 1 year ago
I've seen studies where they circumcised babies while under MRI observations. The brain showed signs of serious trauma, shock, and semi coma. Some of the changes made to the brain were permanent! They've also done blood tests, which showed the babies stress hormones were still highly elevated months after the surgery...
michellemabelle123 1 year ago
They fall asleep from trauma, not because they are comfortable, which is what the "Dr" makes it sound like.
Mamafoofoobear 1 year ago
This dr is apparently very unaware, she said that UTI's and things were caused because it's hard to pull back the foreskin and keep them clean during the first year, you don't retract the foreskin. I'm so sick of Dr's and websites and television shows putting out false and incorrect information. Why don't you know your facts before handing them out to others.
Mamafoofoobear 1 year ago
This dr is apparently very unaware, she said that UTI's and things were caused because it's hard to pull back the foreskin and keep them clean you don't retract the foreskin. I'm so sick of Dr's and websites and television shows putting out false and incorrect information. Why don't you know your facts before handing them out to others.
Mamafoofoobear 1 year ago
It is important to remember that parents in America are confused when it comes to caring for an intact child. UTI's or other problems could come from improper cleaning, forced retraction, etc. Treat intact boys as intact girls! Wipe the outside and bath regularly. That's all! No pulling, peeling, or anything! My mother lived in England for 30 years where everyone is intact and never heard of a boy getting a UTI.
michellemabelle123 1 year ago
just because its circumcised doesn't necessarily mean its cleaner. a circumcised guy may not keep his clean while an uncircumcised guy may be a generally cleaner guy
joyariffic 1 year ago
the doctor is pro circ and leaves out several important aspects ... she simply tries to lie
igel85 1 year ago 2
@captainbryce1 my son fell asleep during his, just for the record. This isn't even an issue, it's the parents decision. Find me a newborn that can make it's own smart decisions and maybe I'll change my mind, oh right, you can't, because no newborn can. And I did it for my sons sake, because every guy I know that isn't circumcised, got picked on a lot back in high school, and had a lot of UTI's.
xSingSingDeathHousex 1 year ago
@xSingSingDeathHousex
"every guy I know that isn't circumcised [...] had a lot of UTI's."
Funny, my friends never talk to me about their dick diseases.
SergeDevinge 1 year ago
@SergeDevinge yeah maybe thats cuz your a guy, my guy friends trust me, and im a girl they know that I can help them, if they need me too.
xSingSingDeathHousex 1 year ago
@xSingSingDeathHousex
"every guy I know that isn't circumcised [...] had a lot of UTI's.""
Stop that, it's so OBVIOUSLY made up that it's pathetic, circumcision prevents UTI only during the FIRST YEAR of life, learn your facts before trying to BS people.
And seriously how could anyone believe that all uncut guys you know had "lot of UTIs" AND told you about it? Or do you know ONE uncut guy?
You're just ridiculing yourself and pro-circ (but they do not need you to be ridicule)
SergeDevinge 1 year ago
@xSingSingDeathHousex
If your anecdote was any relevant, Europe would be plagged with UTIs. I have never heard anything on TV or from medical authorities, like "look at that big public health issue we have in Europe, nothing like that in USA thanks to circumcision!"
Why? Beacause every single "benefit" claimed for circumcision is either awfull exageration or plain BS.
SergeDevinge 1 year ago
@xSingSingDeathHousex
"it's the parents decision"
Give me ONE reason why I should be allowed to remove my son's foreskin and not his toenails (some sportsmen do it, toenails are only good to hurt, be dirty and infected)
SergeDevinge 1 year ago
Funny that diminished risk of getting STDs is used as an argument for INFANT circumcision. Are they afraid their toddler is going to have unprotected sex? When he get old enough to have sex, he at least have a word to say about how he wants his body.
If at age 15 someone had told me, hey if I remove that piece of your penis you will be very partially protected if you have unsafe sex, honestly I would have thought this guy is a retard.
SergeDevinge 1 year ago
@Fletch6 The only reason it is down here in CA is all the damn Mexicans! Mexicans make up 66% of births.....wihite only 17%! Whites are still circumcising at a 87% rate (CDC). I was cut at 18 andnow have 3 circumcised son's (5,3,1) and can assure you it is far superior to be cut!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher Please provide a source for your statistics as they relate to the circumcision rates of whites in California.
Fletch6 1 year ago
@Fletch6 Just go to the CDC site and it is spelled out right there that the only reason the rates in the west are down is because of the large hispanic baby boom......actual breeding program for Aztlan (google it). We need to change the 14th Ammendment and drive these animals south!
Normal white Americans still circumcise, only a handful are not. I would bet you are not even circumcised! You can always move to MExico where they like there burritos with lots of cheese......LMAO!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher Obviously, you are just a bigot. I will be ignoring your comments.
Fletch6 1 year ago
@sjbeacher I'm not mexican, I'm live in California and I'm not circumcised. And most of the people I know that are having/had boys in the last 3 or 4 years haven't had them circumcised either (they are white). So I agree that the rate is falling across the board (and not just because of "the Mexicans" you fucking racist). Anyways, the rate nationwide has also fallen in the last 10 years to between 55 and 57% (accounting for all races/ethnicities). Wake up, there's just is no point to it anymore!
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@captainbryce1 Who cares about other races! According to the CDC 87% of white boys are still being circumcised. Come on are you really happy with a doggy dick? Where you born in the USA? All our family and extended family all have circumcised their boy's! It is revolting why anyone would want their kid to run around like that! If I had a daughter she would be taught that uncut guys spread disease and to stay away from them! It is cleaner, healthier, better looking and improves sex!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher "who cares about other races" - that would be the people who are not RACIST DOUCHBAGS! Congratulations for being circumcised. You probably never had a choice in the matter. How can cutting parts off "improve" anything. If you take a shower everyday cleanliness isn't a factor. And yes, I'm very happy I got to keep all the parts I was born with. I still have all my nerve endings and won't have to worry about losing sensitivity. Circumcision is mutilation plain and simple!
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@captainbryce1 I was circumcised at 18 and never regreted it (31 now) and had no hesitation to have my son's circumcised. You have an issue with being the odd man out! Thats why you are against circumcision and are not even circumcised! Circumcised is far superior, no mutilation or loss of sexual sensitivity.....thats all anti BULLSHIT!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher You chose to be circumcised. GOOD FOR YOU! (if I even believe your story) you had that choice to do that. I also had that choice and chose NOT to. Your argument is illogical. Why would I have an "odd man out" issue when I can always make a choice in the matter? I'm against circumcision because I think EVERYBODY should have the right to make that choice. It's that simple. And there have been plenty of other people that DO lose sensitivity after being cut. You don't represent everyone.
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@sjbeacher Oh, by the way, I just checked up on your "stats". Turns out the rate of circumcision today (all races) in the US was down to 55% in 2003. Since hispanics only make up 15% of the population, how do you explain the rate being so low? Even if EVERY hispanic in the US was intact, the rate should still be much higher (according to you) if 87% of whites were still doing it. Whites make up 80% of the population. The latest CDC stats on circumcision are from 1999 (11 YEARS AGO). Nice try!
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@captainbryce1 Considering the wetbacks have the greatest birth rates it is easy to see......doesn't matter of the population, but it matters of the birth rate! Births in California are 67% hispanic (wetbacks), 17% white and the remaining either Asian or Black!
I would bet you are European born and came here without a clue! Uncircumcised is nasty and disgusting! As my wife and her friends say, they have a Mexican's Dick! No self respecting white American female would have sex with an uncut guy
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher I'm not even going to attempt to have a rational debate with an ignorant racist. The fact that you are so ignorant in one facet of life only proves that you are an ignorant person all around, so your ignorance regarding circumcision doesn't surprise me. You clearly have bigger issues that you need to work out and I really feel sorry that white Americans that have YOU to give them such a bad name. This is why everyone thinks that white people are racist, BECAUSE OF YOU! Congratulations
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@captainbryce1 Most everyone I know dislikes wetbacks.....rather have an educated black in my neighborhood (thankfully we have no blacks either).
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher Charming. Good to know you're a racist as well.
endofscene 1 year ago
@endofscene I know I am charming!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher Oh, and lastly, this is simple math. If only 15% of the US population is hispanic and 80% is white and only 55% of people are having their sons circumcised, then its obviously much more than the hispanics that are causing the decline. People are more educated now and have access to more information regarding circumcision than they did before. Pediatricians don't recommend it anymore and there are no real benefits to doing it beyond tradition. THE END!
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@captainbryce1 Dude, officially wetbacks are 18% and quickly growing. Their birth rate is like that of rabbits and these animals do not circumcise, that is the only reason the circ rate is down. Also, my boys are circumcised and don't count on the official count as the go by hospital discharge records! Their doctor only circumcises in his office after discharge......Go figure and he has a 100% circ rate of his delivered males!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher Dude you are either a liar making a bunch of shit up or just completely ignorant of facts because nothing you are saing is true. The NY times just a few days ago announced as reported by the CDC that the rate of US circumcision is down AGAIN to just 33% in the last 3 years (2006-2009), LOOK IT UP! So much for your entire bullshit racist argument! I feel sorry for your boys by the way. Hopefully they'll evolve past you one day, but the apple usually doesn't fall very far from the tree!
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@captainbryce1 Dipshit do you know how they got 33%? Circumcisions that were done in the hospital and paid by insurance. So, as my boys were all circumcised at the doctors office they don't count, any circumcision that the parents paid for, not counted.....It is a Bullshit Propoganda from the anti circ dweebs! So, pull your head out of your ass, circumcision is alive and well! Did you read about Canada doing a "U" turn on their circ policy?
BTW- You are black, correct?
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@sjbeacher DIPSHIT most boys that are circumcised are done so before they are discharged from the hospital within the first 2 days of birth! Hardly ANYBODY ever does it after that (unless they are Jewish or crazy)! Anyways, you lost the argument before you even started. Your own source contradicted you LIAR. But whatever you need to tell yourself to feel good about your mutilated dick I guess! Goodbye dumbass...
captainbryce1 1 year ago
Circumcision is on a HUGE Increase again, not just in North America but also in Europe for the first time in over 50 years.
This fact is just gonna drive the anti-circ movement insane LOL.
videocircus 1 year ago
@videocircus LOL, it's a good thing this isn't really a "fact". It's also a good thing that such a stat (even if "factual") wouldn't really mean anything whatsoever as it pertains to the value of routine infant circumcision, which is nill. Nice try though! I love how the pro-circ movement is actually the ones who are freaking out about the fact that circumcision rates have dropped steadily every decaded (even in the pro-circ US), lol.
captainbryce1 1 year ago
No crying? Sleeping throughout? I think someone's doing a great job of kidding herself that's for sure! If it aint broke then don't fix it!
hippimummy 1 year ago 4
@hippimummy "Kidding herself", she flat out lied numerous times. She has extreme difficulty in answering direct questions. "What's the trend?" - Instead of answering the question, she relates it to ethnicity. Then when pressed harder, she says there is a "slight" trend. LIE! 85% down to 57% MAJOR trend down! UTI's? First she gets "confused" on her numbers, then doesn't mention the insignificance of ONLY 1 out of 100 uncircumcised boys getting a UTI!
captainbryce1 1 year ago
@captainbryce1 The rate is only down because of the illegal Mexican breeding program! White boys still have an 87% circ rate......even here in CA!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
@hippimummy She also doesn't mention how ridiculously low the chances are of aquiring penis "cancer", "adhesions" or "infections of the foreskin". OMG! These things must be a serious concern and very common! Oh, but she goes out of her way to tell us how small the chances are of any complications are. What's funny is that they are about the same as the chances of problems "cured" by circumcision, which is why the AAP says that the benefits do not outweight the risks. Surprise!
captainbryce1 1 year ago 2
@hippimummy She doesn't think it's mutilation. Of course not, she performs them! But the dictionary definition of mutilation disagrees with her. And of course her response is to compare it to female circumcision (which nobody was even talking about). Just because one form of mutilation is worse than the other, doesn't make male circumcision NOT mutilation! Oh and I love how then NEVER mention any possible sexual side effects from it. Lol, babies go to sleep during circumcision my ass!
captainbryce1 1 year ago 3
@hippimummy I was next to all three of my boys during their circumcisions and not a peep! No tears and no drama.....not a big deal at all!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
just a "small removal of a tiny piece of foreskin"??!! such a joke how they never mention in the cons that circumcision removes 3/4 of the pleasure receptive nerve endings, most of which are more complex than anywhere else on the penis. the foreskin is the primary erogenous zone on a male's body. taking away 3/4 of a male's sexual pleasure over his whole lifetime is one of the most brutal forms of mutilation in existence. it's child abuse and rape.
fruitybud420 1 year ago 3
@fruitybud420 There is no loss of sexual sensitivity from circumcision, the foreskin only detracts from great sex! I was cut at 18 and can assure you it is far superior than having a doggy dick!
sjbeacher 1 year ago
THEY DONT recommend it anymore because the insurance companies dont pay for it anymore. Parents should know better than performing sexual mutilation on a child, if you keep your body clean you shouldn't have a problem.
STIs are also controlled because there is a protein in the foreskin which kills certin STIs
COMPLICATIONS - the frenulum is the most sensitive part of the penis & is removed with Circumcision, replaced by scar tissue
OVER FIFTY PERCENT OF CIRCUMCISED MALES BECOME IMPOTENT
poosaypirate 1 year ago
one in a hundred sounds pretty rare no wonder aap is neutral claiming no medical benefits. those who do it for religious reasons add "also health" what a dirty trick. besides the son should choose which medical view. an infant is not given the choice be prochoice!
dontcutthebaby8 1 year ago
@dontcutthebaby8 and compare to females! males have less uti than the females so it cant be related to foreskin girls dont have em.
dontcutthebaby8 1 year ago 3
Jewish Rabbis suck the cut off skin from the jewish baby's penis.The jewish doctors don't tell about that.
theseventhprotocol 1 year ago 3
BJU International 99 (4), 864-869 (British Journal of Urology International,
Volume 99 Issue 4 Page 864 - April 2007)
Circumcision removes the most sensitive part of a man's penis. The five most sensitive areas of the penis are on the foreskin. The transitional region from the external to the internal foreskin is the most sensitive region of the uncircumcised penis and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis.
freedom0f5peech 1 year ago 3
Circumcision never needs to be done!! don't let these greedy brain-washing medical people lie to you!! This is proven true-logic... Animal circumcision is 100% unnecessary, Female circumcision is 100% unnecessary, and MALE CIRCUMCISION HAS SECRETLY ALWAYS BEEN 100% unnecessary!!! Animals, Females and off course males are born with PHIMOSIS!! Animals have foreskin, females have foreskin (clitoral hood), and males off course have foreskin!! Foreskin is not just a male thing!!
seaco2000 1 year ago 2
This video is lamentable. Mendenhall has done many circs and is blind to the problems they can cause. Many doctors still do not use proper pain management. You would never know from hearing her that the rate in the Pacific states is about 25% and falling. San Diego cannot possibly mirror "national trends." All of CA is ahead of the curve.
Circ ablates the most sensitive parts of the penis. Some circs result in a sexually damaged penis, especially after age 40 or 50.
alnot01 2 years ago 4
@alnot01 THERE ARE statistics on the impotency rate on norm,co , uk ( i recomend this page to all of you!) on the impotency rate of Circ.d men
poosaypirate 1 year ago
you'll just understand how " hottie " when you lose your penis
backtublive 2 years ago
The doctor is pretty ignorant on the data. UTIs are easily treatable with $30 of antibiotics. Adhesions only occur in circumcised infants. Complications runs up to 9%.
DavidWiltonNet 2 years ago 6
This is gentle, subtile, propaganda, but it is propaganda! They would give sugar to the BabyBoy in order to ease his pain, how funny is that? Give the sugar to the monkeys :-(((
And instead, talk about human rights and the freedom of choice... well understood the freedom of choice for the very owner of the male member!
kleenex3000 2 years ago 7