The RCTs are too weak to be conclusive. Their major weakness is:
Men with foreskin PROBLEMS (cuts, abrasions, infections) would have gravitated towards the trials to be circumcised. So, THE RCTs MAY NOT REFLECT THE GENERAL MALE POPULATION.
Men assigned to the “Control” got to KEEP their defective foreskin, whilst circumcised men had their defect REMOVED. This would bias results, if the GENERAL male population has far less foreskin problem. Defective foreskin is more prone to HIV infection!
I guess from me, I can see this wont get me anywhere. I honestly apologize for going a little too far with some of my assertions, although didnt appreciate the childish name calling, I feel I probably brought on that bile. To me, cut guys are missing something fundamental and its not their fault. Im happy to admit I was being a little inflammatory and for that, I apologize to whomever raised an eyebrow at those comments...peace, and Im out,.
An authority visits 5 different prisons and rounds up the convicted murderers and rapists and tally's up, how many clipped and how many normals...I would bet my left nut, there would be a 60 to 90% prevalence of clipped males in those line ups...GUARANTEED
This would be an incredibly dramatic study and prove a lot about circumcision and violent crime.
@KaneLongTroy ".......THE CONCLUSIVE TEST" This is YOUR supposition and not conclusive at all. 60-90% prevalance of clipped (sic) males in line ups of convicted murderers and rapists? Concrete statistics please? You have none.
hmmm, after assessing the scenario... I believe there's no major point for circumcision. There's no need to bring out such inconviniences to newborn children. Like you said in the more HIV potent countries of course circumcision is indeed necessary. Here in the US though it isn't
the organism is wired for pleasure, pleasure is the key to the survival instinct, when you lose the foreskin, the area of your brain responsible for receiving those electrical receptions dies and atrophies. Large areas of your brains are completely disabled. This makes you unpredictably aggressive.
@KaneLongTroy i know C0nc0rdance [the uploader] encouraged people of youtube to speak freely in an open discussion but wow...there's like 2 of you here [both with Kanes in your names - that rhymes lol] that have repetitively posted enough grief. It is practically the equivalent of spam. Yes, spam, I said it.
You guys need to stop. You have made your points. Now GGIIIITTT OOOUUT [South Park reference lol]
@beanbag641 SPAM?? See...thats what I mean, you guys are all about random aggression and name calling. You have absolutely no relevance, you're about the pack dog mentality. If you make a point worth responding to...I might make an effort, otherwise go watch south park...(southpark is a jewish production too right? Totally vile and random bull sh*t from what i can see, just drivell on television))
@KaneLongTroy lmao South Park isn't even a Jewish production you retard.
FYI South Park is a show designed to rip into idiots such as yourself.
Because look at you. Was I even being aggresive? lol you need to lay off youtube, your the one being the aggressor. you call people thugs yet you go round insulting the crap of people, generalising and discriminating them and yet you think your a justifier. More like a full of sh*t preacher
I really think many of these pro circ guys are just posting out of bravado. go to any foreskin restoration forum and you will see the true thoughts of these sexless, dried out, hardened, stumpy dicks. Frustrated, full of sadness and loss and regret for what they lost.
I too feel sorry for them. Take heart, there is a tool that you can use to "stretch" your remaining skin to access some protection from bacteria.. Over time, you can get some sensitivity back.
@KaneLongTroy lol I even don't agree with circumcism and I find you and your friends annoying. I don't think anybody here likes you at all. I think thats saying something. Do yoursef a favour and go get a life. Go socialize with people. It won't do you any harm
Gee, trying to educate people is now a popularity contest? Way too often the truth is not popular--especially when it comes to infant genital mutilation.
CIRCUMCISION AND THE RISE OF VIOLENT CRIME INC. RAPE
According to neuro psychologist James Prescott, a study correlates directly violent crime and the rise of sexually active circumcised males in society..
C0nc0rdance, why don't you explain to us why you didn't mention that the foreskin is the most sensitive part of the entire penis? Sorrells et al. (2007) BJU.
Then in your next video you compare the foreskin to the tonsils. Are the tonsils the most sexually sensitive part of a mans body?
What you have done here is called lying by omission, and you've done so in such a way that supports violating others rights. That is despicable. Correct your video like a true scientist or you are the denialist
@getrealrubberseal The Sorrells 2007 paper has been called into question by a umber of other peer-reviewed journals (AUA, BUA etc) and the hype about the foreskin being the most sensitive part is highly questionable anyway: it cannot be proven. In your 2nd sentence you put words into his mouth by mis-associating what he said in a different context. Desperate much? You have accused someone of violating 'rights': C0nc0rdance has done NO such thing.
@TheTradWarrior, sorry to butt in, but I'm wondering if you know what you are talking about! I'm not aware of any journal called the AUA or BUA, so I'm at a loss as to how the Sorrells' study could have received criticism from that quarter, without a miraculous intervention..
If the AUA stands for "American Urology Association", that is not a journal, and moreover, I don't believe the association (or any other) has commented on the study.
@dandydosbest 1] Oh my lord. I don't remember even replying to you. Lol, you think that just because I was 12 years old I am not a reference? Listen dude, I used to wack off before I was 12. And I also wacked off after my circumcision. Having an orgasm was the SAME feeling. Lol, as if YOU know the details of MY penis, but if you must know: my orgasm feels alot more stronger the more I last wacking off. Alot more sperm comes out and it's much less viscous. Try and debunk that.
@SkyCoil, don't doubt for a minute that many boys die from their circumcision wound in Africa and other third world countries, just as circumcised girls do (perhaps about equally for both genders, since conditions are the same)! Complications from male newborn (or infant) circumcisions in western countries are well documented, although I'm not sure about associated deaths. But I don't think that "death" should be the only criterion for significant complication or harm.
"Complications from male newborn (or infant) circumcisions in western countries are well documented, although I'm not sure about associated deaths."
Complications are hardly WELL documented--only those during and immediately after circumcision--most complications show up later and they are ignored.
There are quite a few DOCUMENTED deaths from circumcision..also just ignored.
@dandydosbest 2] If the cultures from different regions in the world all simultaneously came up with the idea for circumcision, doesn't it mean there was a former and similiar reason to undergo it? This was probably caused by the small percentage that needed it to be done due to medical issues with their foreskins. I presume that depending on whatever culture, circumcism grew into a traditional act due to either religion, representation of machismo or libido, abstinence or hygiene.
@dandydosbest 3] Not saying that either of those cultural reasons are necessarily correct or nay, but to be fair, it doesn't cause rediculous harm either. No one gets killed from it, really. Big f**king deal. But here you are wasting your damn time (and mine) dedicating it into being a anti-circumcision activist. Finally, I feel sorry for you, but hey - that's what you're passionate about I guess, I can't question it. Spend your time enjoying it then good for you. Just leave me be.
@Tandykane "@SkyCoil, ..........ever thought of just leaving?"
Oh dear, TK.......yet another sane person has caught on and disagreed with you! Of course you want him to stop posting and go away. There are more and more of us fed up with all the 'anti' bullshit. You can't stop people saying what they want to say: it's our democratic right; our 'human right'. Heh-heh.
Did you even bother to READ his posts? He was complaining about us responding to this posts and getting notices in his inbox.. so if that bothered him, I suggested he leave--I did not tell him to leave--hell, I want all of your here, it is so easy to debunk your evidence-free subjective "knowledge".
"No one gets killed from it, really. Big f**king deal" REALLY? There is an estimated 230 infants who die from it in the US alone--and many more hundreds in the rest of the world.
Would like some DOCUMENTED cases?
NOW, how is it silly or a waste of time to try preventing these senseless deaths?
@Tandykane agreed, Prescot claims the number is 1 out of 500,000, sheesh, I dont care who you are, losing ur kid even in 1 in a million shot for such a pointless and harmful cosmetic procedure would be a "no brainer" to avoid.
@Tandykane Yeh but, how many of those cases include the child having an outside health error that merely required a circumcision as a trigger? Exactly.
And hey, if you really want the harsh truth: the more humans die via fatalities or are prevented from being born actually helps the human race as a whole from reaching extinction. It's a tad off topic there, but...
Ever thought of just not replying to me? I didn't message you. You 3 idiots just keep on barraging my inbox with crap.
"how many of those cases include the child having an outside health error that merely required a circumcision as a trigger?"
Well, then if this is your excuse, then you need to provide evidence for it.
Incidentally, "in Oslo, Norway, over a 26-year period in which 20,000 male babies were cared for, 3 circumcisions were performed-a frequency rate of 0.02%.
Ever thought that if you don't want people to refute your claims, that you just not post here?--just a thought.
BTW, most of those deaths were the DIRECT result of the circumcision, and the remainder would not have occurred if not for the circumcision.. simple logic:
@SkyCoil With these 3 idiots, I suppose we must tread a fine line between putting our case so that dickheads like Jessica Tandy, KaneLongTroy and TlcTugger and others don't rule the net and get everything their way, and frankly, not wanting to feed the trolls.....
@Tandykane - Yep! YOu're a troll. And you've been doing it for YEARS-
tell us: what productive, measurable, or meaningful difference has all of
your wasted time gone in all this? Yeah- nothing. Again- valid evidence
has been given- your inability to do anything about it (religious freedom, parental consent and privacy rights) and your inability to refute them (medical science) - is glaring. So- tell us: what power do you have to dictate to parents & medical teams what it is they "owe" you?
@Tandykane Perhaps you are psychologically damaged after all, and have problems accepting any data or views that conflict with your own. You're in denial.
So, you believe that one believing in and following the scientific process as it relates to evidence is psychologically damaged? This speaks more about you than those you try to disparage.
"I'm not aware of any journal called the AUA or BUA, so I'm at a loss as to how the Sorrells' study could have received criticism from that quarter, without a miraculous intervention."
I wonder if you would care to address my comment to you, perhaps by correcting yourself, or is that too hard for you to do? You did make the statement that the "AUA" and "BUA etc." had cast doubt on Sorrells' findings, didn't you?
@dandydosbest Now then little lady, now then! Don't get above yourself. AUA and BUA do in fact stand for the American Urology Association and the British Urology Association, and both of them quoted refutations of the Sorrells 2007 "study" as being fundamentally flawed. Besides that see the Blaustein reports of 2003 & 2007, Siegfried et al 2003, Auvert et al 2005, and usaid.gov/foreskin//circ.
@TheTradWarrior, you just get funnier! First, you said that the "AUA" and "BUA" were "journals". Once I corrected you, they turn into associations!
The problem for you is that the "BUA" does not even exist as an association! And although the "AUA" is an organisation, it has never commented on Sorrels' study.
But if you claim that your two presumed associations DID criticise Sorrells, please provide me the reference for their comments, and quote them too!
@dandydosbest The acid tones disguised as "honeyed" that you employ make any 'request' of yours and anything else you say deeply unreasonable. In spite of being a health professional you really know very little of importance and are only concerned with your own prejudices.
I suspect that you are just a troll who has jumped on the phoney "human rights" wagon and milking it for all it is worth. If you went to Cheltenham Ladies College, then you should favour the circumcised not the stinkywinkies
Cheltenham Ladies College girls admire men who have the self-respect to wash, and are proud of the natural male body. I feel sorry for men whose penis was altered to suit the dictates of their parents.
I certainly wouldn't want such presumptious, arrogant parents as in-laws.
@dandydosbest Oh don't be so stupid! For your information, nobody's asking you or indeed considering you as in-laws anyway! Upper and middle class girls prefer the glorious look of a circumcised penis on a man, as that's what they are used to and expect from that class of men. We are proud to be circumcised and will not accept any politically correct bullshit from certain sections of the National Health Service who would make us see otherwise. Cut is the way to go despite all the anti propaganda
@TheTradWarrior, no true-blooded Englishman circumcises sons, only Muslims and twisted Jews do it.
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO ADMIT YOU LIED IN YOUR CLAIM THAT THE "AUA" AND BUA (sic!) EXPRESSED ANY OPINION ON THE SORRELL'S STUDY?
An Englishman can admit when he is wrong. You cannot! You are neither a gentleman nor an Englishman. You are a fool, who just wallows in ignorance and fatuous pride. You are tedious and dull, and that's all that emerges from all your remarks.
@dandydosbest Do not presume to SHOUT at me. Did you even bother to read my post of a day ago? Have you not UNDERSTOOD any of C0nc0rdance's video and the facts - FACTS - stated therein? Don't give me any rubbish such as "no true-blooded Englishman circumcises sons", as this is patently untrue, and you know it! You're just revealing your ignorance. Nor should you refer to 'only Muslims & "twisted" Jews' as you are showing your racist side!
@dandydosbest (2) Not that the British medical 'establishment is up to much these days. If you truly believe in your medical status, then you should be properly trained to care for patients with skill, knowledge, kindness, compassion and use of common sense, rather than all the paperwork and dubious "courses" you're sent on these days and all the box-ticking that requires. Then, maybe patients in NHS hospitals wont be dying on trolleys waiting hours to be seen.
@dandydosbest (3) So, little lady, don't presume to lecture me on minor points when there is so much lacking in your own 'profession'. See the bigger picture, acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, you don't know everything, and stop lecturing others on issues on which you do not have a right to hold an opinion! Do you NOW start to see that you picked a fight with the wrong person? I walk in circles around you.
@TheTradWarrior, YOU presented no facts, just error, which your pride won't allow you to correct in a noble fashion. A true Englishman has honour and fair play.You have neither, AND no argument!
As for Concordance, his video presents very few "FACTS" (as I'm sure he would admit). Experimental data aren't facts, and moreover are contradicted by other data. He reckons ca.10% of men will need circumcision (baloney!), yet then says Finns are less than 2% circumcised! So, WHICH one is fact, genius?!
@dandydosbest He has given facts & stats and left his own viewpoint on the sidelines. You're taking two independent strands of his video and mixing them up to suit your own argument, and at that, not very effectively. As a woman, you are not qualified to have an opinion on this issue. This is not a YT strand promoted by so-called "intactivists" where you all run with each others' batons, so if you don't like what people say, then you are free to leave.....and mind your own business.
@TheTradWarrior, you say that as a woman I am not qualified to express an opinion on circumcision.
So, do you criticise the millions of American mothers who sign up their sons to be circumcised each year? Do you think that circumcising sons should be left to the father's choice, and that women should butt out?
@dandydosbest Why do you want to know?? No, I don't really have a stance on female circumcision. But, like most women, you are mixing up two different issues and then making your point. Female circumcision doesn't really have a medical, hygiene, religious or aesthetic reason, and I gather that in African culture, the clit is totally excised, leaving no clitoral stimulation (obviously); a bit like chopping off the entire penis, so no, I don't agree with it, but as I said it's a different issue.
You are confusing the CLAIMS of benefits for male circumcision with actually having PROVEN benefits..hence your arguments fall completely apart--but don;t let reality interfere with your fantasies.
More reality for you:Female circumcision does not reduce sexual activity
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (vol 109, p 1089)
@dandydosbest (2) Fyi, no, I don't criticise American mothers who sign their sons up to be done, as they're on the right side of the argument.I know just what you're about though, so don't even TRY that one on me; and don't give me any more of this silly nonsense about human rights.
"they're on the right side of the argument" REALLY? Then why are you unable to supply ANY evidence to support your claim--or any to refute the opposite claim--a warrior without a weapon.
Curious that you believe me to be psychologically damaged because I do NOT advocate the mutilation of helpless infants--it is much more logical to think those doing so are the ones psychologically damaged. Perhaps projection is at work?
What's funny is these trolls don't realise that they only feed on their own insecurities sugarcoated by temporary satisfaction. However we must remember not to stoop down to their level. I mean, look at me. I'm not even the type of person to argue, but these people (person?) just...
It's like beanbag said, they're practically spambots: they work by a one way argument; they only spurt out crap and never absorb. And they reak of hypocrisy.
@Tandykane Dw, this is my last message - depleted of patience, I admit. In the end of the day, you're just a bunch of failed terrorists. Not in the sense of morality, but rather in a sense that as activists, you aren't affective. If you hate circumcision so much (which according to your channels, you really do; wouldn't be surprised if you three are the same person), then do something that'll really make the nation stutter, rather than being a bunch of Youtube trolls nobody likes.
@SacrificialScapeGoat I notice how many of you are aggressive little name calling thugs. You all mostly get personal at the drop of a hat. Its the brain cell deterioration. Makes you futile in your arguments
@SacrificialScapeGoat heh...tootdles, you guys just cant comment without resorting to some sort of name calling. My guess is an overall general sense of frustration. And ur free to leave any time. How does your staying to waffle in any way affect me. Just stop posting...easy.
@KaneLongTroy Aggressive little name calling thugs? Bit rich coming from you! "....sexless,dried out, hardened, stumpy dicks..........frustrated, full of sadness and loss..." WE'RE getting personal??
@TheTradWarrior, hi there again! You seem to be giving us intactivists a hard time (you're running with your friend's baton, I think). We intactivists had better ensure we get our facts right. We don't always.
So, when can we expect you to provide a rational, ethical, and PROVEN justification for NT infant circumcision--this insults, taunts, and name-calling is way beyond BORING!
No "Journal" has put the Sorrells paper into question. Two insane men (Jake & Brian) wrote a letter claiming their was a problem with the data regarding the glans. No problem with the data regarding the foreskin. However, this letter from these two insane men was refuted in two follow up letters.
Why is the fact that the foreskin is the most sensitive part questionable? Why the denial? This has been known for thousands of years. Every intact man knows this, ask.
No "Journal" has put the Sorrells paper into question. Two insane men (Jake & Brian) wrote a letter claiming their was a problem with the data regarding the glans. No problem with the data regarding the foreskin. However, this letter from these two insane men was refuted in two follow up letters.
Why is the fact that the foreskin is the most sensitive part questionable? Why the denial? This has been known for thousands of years. Every intact man knows this, ask
(cont) if the information for risk and reward of the procedure all originated within the same area as I would assume the medical risk is higher in a country with less developed medical treatment. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
@C0nc0rdance Hi there I was watching this and one thing that struck me regarding the data to complications, the information you show has the implication that the medical benefits are greater then the medical disadvantages. On this I was thinking is this not slightly biased as the medical information seems to be taken from treatment in the US etc however the risk factors they are preventing are mostly in less developed countries would it not be more balanced (cont)
Actually, he fails to address the PROVEN risks altogether.. he ignores the studies that show the real rate of complications (minor and catastrophic)--and completely ignores the risk of unnecessary deaths--even in "civilized" countries.
I'm opposed to non-medically necessary coercive/forced circs for children, especially when based on cultural/religious dogma. Instead, we should increase condom use & testing, and encourage informed consent at an age approaching sexual activity.
In fact...wouldnt the baseless knowledge that a modified knob actually incites and encourages reckless sexual behavior? "I cant get aids...because I got no foreskin" "I can dip it into anything and Im safe" The idea that carving off the skin actually protects you, actually promotes the dirty behavior that creates more disease. The entire arguement is hillarious from every practical aspect.
I've had circumcision at the age of 12. When it comes to orgasms, nothing changes. Nothing. And theoretically losing 20,000 nerve endings means you'd last alot longer in bed =P.
Also this maybe due to well timed puberty, but after the circumsision I definately remember the girth of my penis being bigger, especially in flacid mode. Note it took around 2 months for my penis to heal, and longer until every grain of stitch disappeared, so again this could be just puberty giving me some beefcake.
@SkyCoil hehe, in mick jjaggers words "I cant get no...satisfaction" Your girlfriend probably starts mentally writing her shopping list while ur at it. Wasnt there a study done in the 70's indicating the majority of violent crime as inordinately perpetrated by circumcised males. You wont get satisfaction but leave your sons alone.
@KaneLongTroy I can tolerate people lecturing me on a subject, infact I could agree with them & respect their opinion and effort regardless, however you need to be addressed personally.
First off, why the insults? Are you THAT sensitive to the issue? What happened? Did your father decide you would be circumcised as a baby, and an intern accidentally cut off your glans penis?
Why bring crime into the debate? Wtf? Were you molseted by a circumcised man as a child? Take a chill pill.
@SkyCoil yes i was molested as a child...so? ...wait a minute...arent we both fighting against this ridiculous jewish custom? Why are you swinging lol
@KaneLongTroy Oh. Sorry dude. Tbf this circumcision debate has gone too in depth for my taste. I'm usually more observatory, but I just wanted to throw in a small bone, like everyone else I thought would. But it seems plenty more people find this subject to be an alarming and delicate one at that. I had no idea. For that, I'm out.
Keep it steady. Happy trails to you, until we meet again =P.
@SkyCoil, non-therapeutic infant circumcision is a crime. It flies against a person's right to autonomy (making one's own choices) and phsyical integrity. If it is a crime to perform any kind of genital cutting on girls, why would the same prinicple not apply to boys? Non-therapeutic circumcision is not a medical procedure. To be medical (rather than cosmetic), you would have to have good evidence that it has a net medical benefit, i.e. benefit is greater than harm or risk of harm.
The Scandinavians found that cut men have PE more often than normal men.
In a study investigating the adequacy of condom sizes, Richters, Gerofi, and Donovan noted that circumcised men had significantly shorter erect penises by a mean length of 8mm than genitally intact men (p<.05). The difference in erect penile size was attributed to insufficient skin to accomodate the erection.
Better yet, how about you coming back when you have something of substance in support of NY infant circumcision instead of the tired old games you have been playing... like a proven necessity for it, like PROVEN benefits and a justification for the PROVEN harm, inherent risks and the justification for the violation of their basic human rights.
BTW, you might wish to consider SCIENTIFIC evidence, and not bogus "medical evidence".
@Tandykane It's cool how...passionate you are about the subject, digging through the recessess to find any kind of statistic information that will try and contradict my own penis. There's no need to desperately try & throw me or the uploader off balance here; remember that every individual is unique and I'm merely stating my own experiences, and kudos to the uploader since he's discussed this situation whilst being completely unbiased, unlike yourself. No offense, I'm not against you.
But the problem is, facts and evidence exist, and if your claims are counter to them, they cannot be considered credible.
Bias is your latest argument, then how can you believe the uploader when he has ignored the empirical evidence that counter his claim--his bias is cherry-picking and ignoring stronger evidence?
@Tandykane "The Scandinavians found that cut men....etc". First off, 'Scandinavians' comprise four different countries: who do you mean? Secondly, they would say that as they are traditionally a non-circumcising culture, so have an axe to grind in that respect.
@SkyCoil: Of course this is a bogus citation: dig deeper and you'll find that Tandykane is full of them, while always decrying the results of studies that do not comply with his views.
Im not directing this to anyone specifically, but can we at least agree that the old "health" argument for circumcision is a mute point. You wouldnt remove your brain because you can get a tumor or remove your eyelids because you might get an infection. Isnt this a logical argument and if so, why are still people blaming the normal god given penis for the individuals poor hygiene or bad sex partner choices.
Im not directing this to anyone specifically, but can we at least agree that the old "health" argument for circumcision is a mute point. You wouldnt remove your brain because you can get a tumor or remove your eyelids because you might get an infection. Isnt this a logical argument and if so, why are still people blaming the normal god given penis for the individuals poor hygiene or bad sex partner choices.
How did this debauchery go from a quaint little jewish custom, obscure...weird and "nauseating" ...to a medically valid procedure that is almost imperative in many christians minds...how?
The point is this is an ancient Jewish practice. Why the world is following the dictates of a small "sect like" religion (compared to the population of christians) and butchers the male human phallus in young children is a question worth studying and the answer worth pursuing.- Its ludicrous...fine for jews but why is the western world doing it.
Freakin hilarious, you're ALL broken and cut and lost and you simply want others to support your new condition without a real penis. Eat ur position and stop mauling ur kids. simple. A real penis has a protective covering thaT doubles as an exclusively sensual device for heightened pleasure. YOU DONT HAVE THAT...go join a foreskin restoration forum and cry with the others!!!
@KaneLongTroy, right, and Christians don't circumcise. St. Paul said it had "no value" (letter to the Galatians). As I wearily point out to some Christians, particularly from the USA, there's no such thing as a "Christian" circumcision (who would do it - a mohel?!), and hospital circumcisions have no religious significance.
@psandbergnz Yes but often you have to make allowances for Americans. They are a country of individuals freedom based and can do whatever they wish...even if its totally stupid. The next step is lopping of the knob itself...now we really got hygiene...hahahaha, or ball sack removal. The scrotum gets all sweaty in summer...surely that would be "smart" too? Im sure there would be a doctor to recommend it if the procedure was lucrative...hahaha
@KaneLongTroy Wow, you're a total douchebag. I mean quite honestly, you seem to have an elitist attitude towards something that someone cannot change.
@AdamTehBoss, just to butt in: so how are we supposed to discourage dumbass parents (esp. those from the USA) from subjecting their baby boys to this unnecessary and traumatic procedure? WATCH a baby boy being circumcised, if only on Youtube (if you dare). How can this NOT be described as a debauchery? This is still happening to the majority of U.S. boys.
@dandydosbest Hahahah. I'm not snipped & my views on it are unsure, but your attitude seems typical of an anti-circumcision wack-job. Considering you apparently know how his junk works more than himself perhaps you, KaneLongTroy and TandyKane should all kneel down and suck his cock for him.
@AdamTehBoss Typical moron response, if you cant think of an effective rebuttal, call them names. I have made several relevant and insightful arguments and all you can think of is to call me a name, what a genius
@KaneLongTroy You're not even sure which comment I was replying to, are you? I was replying to the one that referred to circumcised men as "broken and cut and lost", which to me, was offensive. You also said something along the lines of, "go join a foreskin restoration forum and cry with the others!!!!!" Which to me, sounds like a total douchebag. I hadn't read any of your other comments, and I didn't feel as though I needed to. I stand by my comment, you're a total douchebag.
@KaneLongTroy Why would anyone fortunate and civilised enough to have been circumcised WANT to 'restore' ? It's a useless bit of flangy, potentially dirt-encrusted skin that is unattractive to ladies, and merely shows a working class background. Ugh. Fail.
Also, any women that do not crave that soft, luscious foreskin with its delicious suppleness, must use hard, cold plastic dildos for recreation and desire that same plastic experience with a real penis, get back to your plastic ladies, a real penis is delicate and yummy, not a helmet head dried out lump of "woody" meat.
@KaneLongTroy, good point. But cirumcision is now uncommon throughout Europe. It's certainly not the norm here to circumcise infants or newborns. We're not like the USA! I believe that evidence shows that the Philippines began their obsession for circumcision in the 20th century, as the USA swamped your culture.
@psandbergnz (Im not philippino, was just there at the time I opened this account-Im australian with euro origins) Yes I agree that in Europe they are actually normal. This video seems to establish one main premise. Including all the people here debating for circumcisions. That is that the natural normal state of a male sex organ is actually diseased in some way and requires some medical assistance to get it "right"
I am christian, Im not a jew, so hmm...WTF...why is half of the western world clipping their kids following the religious dictates of a "marginAL" religion. My Jewish doctor once told me with enthusiasm that I should consider it. I am sure they laugh at us gentiles and find great satisfaction that they are "reforming" Christianity into Judaism-This is not hate based, just an observation.
Familiar with these tiny Lake flooded African countries. Here is a list with the data and the lakes look at any map of these tiny lands and see them overflowing with fresh water systems. Sub Saharan Africa is the water poor land the CDC is referring to getting one life saved from HIV for every four Circumcision a good return. Please YouTube search “CDC targeting paths to HIV prevention” and hear it for yourself.
@Cas77b, and why should the CDC's views trump those held by medical associations elsewhere? Where's your evidence that in your nation (USA) STDs are commoner in "uncut" men than the "cut"?
Circumcision evidently hasn't done much for the USA (80% circ'd!): USA has the highest level of STDs/HIV out of the developed nations (where circumcision is generally uncommon). Your own CDC says this.
Researcher Michel Garenne (Pasteur Institute) calls circumcision in Africa "a dangerous distraction".
The US and Europe parallel each other in general with close HIV rates. The CDC report is that gay men in the US are not using condoms and have a slightly higher rate of HIV. The Japanese have always valued the use of public baths. Unlike the rest of the industrialized world were plumbing is only about a hundred years old.
Soory, but the US has on average 6X the HIV rate as Europe and Japan.
Unless the CDC can account with hard numbers for the complee failure of circumcision to REDUCE HIV, they are merely fishing for excuses--SCIENCE does not accept excuses.
Plumbing is only 100 years old--how old is HIV?
So, when are you going to refute the CDC study showing undamaged epithelia does not transmit the virus. I don't want to hear some speculation..EVIDENCE,
DC-SIGN cells are sacrificial rather than dieing in the skin when infected with fungi and virus they are transported into the body. The reduction in their cell structure triggers their destruction by the immune system. This offers the body some protection from fungus, but also in time transmission of some diseases like HIV. So wash after sex.
@Tandykane The history is that in sub Saharan Africa some populations circumcise, and some neighboring populations do not. The circumcised population have half the HIV rate this has lead to over twenty years and over 40 studies on fore skin and HIV. It is believed that DC-SIGN cells transport HIV from the inner unkeratinized foreskin to the immune system.
@Cas77b says: "The circumcised popoulation [Sub-Sahara] have half the HIV rate".
That is a false generalisation! There is huge inconsistency in findings. EXPLAIN THIS!:
USAID report 2009 "Levels and Spread of HIV" investigated EIGHTEEN 3rd World countries (nearly all Sub-Saharan) for HIV against male circumcision status. Results were a "mixed picture". In fact, in TEN of those 18 countries, HIV was higher in the CIRCUMCISED men (as % population). Google the USAID report (p.109).
@Cas77b, also explain the findings by researcher Michel Garenne (Pasteur Institute), published in the peer-reviewed "African Journal of AIDs Research" in 2008. Garenne investigated HIV/circumcision data from thirteen African countries. He found a "mixed bag" of results: in over 3 countries (e.g. Cameroon, Lesotho, Malawi), the CIRCUMCISED men actually had more HIV (as % pop.) than the intact, and in SEVEN, there was no difference!
He conludes that circumcsion is not a useful strategy.
Ok so I'm 12 and I am only watching this because I am thinking about being circumsized and I don't know what to think I don't really understand this but I get it a little can you send me anyone a message about any thing I should know??? Thank you
@zombiescod1, why are you considering circumcision? It may be helpful for you to watch the Youtube video: "Why circumcision is unnecessary" by John Travis MD. I think it is wise to choose circumcision only if recommended by one or more doctors. If you have a foreskin problem, there may be alternative treatments to consider. Your doctor should know how to advise you about these.
Washing after sex also works because absorption takes time. Circumcision is best done as an infant were no stitches are needed. Healing is like a paper cut. At your age infection is a risk, and you know to wash after sex instead. Also, always use a condom when you do become sexually active to get the greatest protection. If you want this as body modification and your parents approve a doctor may consider doing it.
Unless you can provide proof for any benefit for NT circumcision, the best time to do it is never.
Now, you are going to have to do better than making some unsupported assertion about healing to justify infant circumcision. You have to PROVE it is necessary in the first place, and THEN how is better as an infant.
@zombiescod1 Dear 12 year old this subject is a mine field of lies by intactavists, people against male circumcision. They try to make the data sound questionable, but circumcision works. That’s why if you google “Bono and Circumcision” you will find it is world aid policy to Africa.
@Cas77b, circumcision is a minefield of lies by circumcision advocates! A circumcision campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa is no evidence of its usefulness as preventative strategy in any developed nation (this boy is Canadian)! STD studies iinvestigating STDs and circumcision in developed nations find NO circumcision advantage. So what's your point?
No medical society recommends it as prophylaxis. Even the South African Medical Asssoc. denounces infant circumcison as "unethical and illegal".
not in the US, it hasn't vs the other industrialized counties, nor here:
There are six African countries where men are *more* likely to be HIV+ if they've been circumcised: Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Swaziland.
or even here: It investigates EIGHTEEN 3rd world countries for HIV and circumcision status (see p.109). It finds a “mixed picture”. In fact, in TEN of the 18 nations, HIV was HIGHER in the CIRCUMCISED men.
@Tandykane, the South African Medical Asssociation is skeptical of findings that circumcision protects from HIV (being in Africa, it should know!).
It put out a statement in June 2011 expressing "serious concern that not enough scientifically-based evidence was available to confirm that circumcision prevented HIV contraction, and that the public was being influenced by misrepresented information."
It added they "do not support circumcision to prevent HIV transmission.” (See online).
The problem is that there is so many BOGUS claims that totally ignores the real world EMPIRICAL evidence that circumcision has not been able to provide any reduction in HIV is still being totally ignored.
People have this silly notion that flawed, questionable studies supersede any and all real world EMPIRICAL evidence that SCIENCE deems the highest form of evidence--that so-called "medical evidence" has more merit than REAL scientific.evidence.
@Tandykane, just to qualify: circumcision can protect from HIV in the event that foreskin is DAMAGED - by abrasion, cuts, infections (the same holds true if ANY part of the penis is harmed).That reason alone could account for the RCT results. NB. the men were randomised at the experimental level, NOT at the population level.
The RCT Control group (the "intact") were probably over-represented by foreskin problems - hence the men sought circumcision! That would bias the RCT results.
@Tandykane, hence John Loannidis is correct about medical studies, i.e. most are unreliable. It is very hard to control for confounding factors, especially if there is expectation bias on the part of the researchers (this will tend to make them oblivious to the limitations of their study, and not address them). RCT circumcision studies are the HARDEST to do reliably! It's frustrating discussing with people who take medical studies as "reality", and even Concordance succombs to this.
"It is very hard to control for confounding factors"
Correct, but it is more correct to say that outside of the laboratory it is IMPOSSIBLE to control for all factors..this is why it is disingenuous to call the African studies "RCT'S".
Sad to see that SCIENCE has been misappropriated by people with an agenda , and that they depend on people being ignorant of real science.
Tinny lake flooded African countries. Easily viewed by maps. We should expect a similar comparison between these countries and the US and Europe. Transmission of HIV is from the under the side of fore skin. Were sacrificial cells transmit it into the immune system. Not enough keratin to form a barrier. Washing and water is the difference. Wash after sex or circumcise.
The RCTs are too weak to be conclusive. Their major weakness is:
Men with foreskin PROBLEMS (cuts, abrasions, infections) would have gravitated towards the trials to be circumcised. So, THE RCTs MAY NOT REFLECT THE GENERAL MALE POPULATION.
Men assigned to the “Control” got to KEEP their defective foreskin, whilst circumcised men had their defect REMOVED. This would bias results, if the GENERAL male population has far less foreskin problem. Defective foreskin is more prone to HIV infection!
psandbergnz 6 days ago
I guess from me, I can see this wont get me anywhere. I honestly apologize for going a little too far with some of my assertions, although didnt appreciate the childish name calling, I feel I probably brought on that bile. To me, cut guys are missing something fundamental and its not their fault. Im happy to admit I was being a little inflammatory and for that, I apologize to whomever raised an eyebrow at those comments...peace, and Im out,.
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
THE CONCLUSIVE TEST...
An authority visits 5 different prisons and rounds up the convicted murderers and rapists and tally's up, how many clipped and how many normals...I would bet my left nut, there would be a 60 to 90% prevalence of clipped males in those line ups...GUARANTEED
This would be an incredibly dramatic study and prove a lot about circumcision and violent crime.
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy ".......THE CONCLUSIVE TEST" This is YOUR supposition and not conclusive at all. 60-90% prevalance of clipped (sic) males in line ups of convicted murderers and rapists? Concrete statistics please? You have none.
TheTradWarrior 4 days ago 2
@KaneLongTroy ^^ If only the West Indian males were circumcised like the Africans, maybe they wouldn't be so prone to antisocial behaviour.^^
No, this is not me speaking - I'm quoting an African statistician.
TheTradWarrior 4 days ago 2
hmmm, after assessing the scenario... I believe there's no major point for circumcision. There's no need to bring out such inconviniences to newborn children. Like you said in the more HIV potent countries of course circumcision is indeed necessary. Here in the US though it isn't
beanbag641 1 week ago
the organism is wired for pleasure, pleasure is the key to the survival instinct, when you lose the foreskin, the area of your brain responsible for receiving those electrical receptions dies and atrophies. Large areas of your brains are completely disabled. This makes you unpredictably aggressive.
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy i know C0nc0rdance [the uploader] encouraged people of youtube to speak freely in an open discussion but wow...there's like 2 of you here [both with Kanes in your names - that rhymes lol] that have repetitively posted enough grief. It is practically the equivalent of spam. Yes, spam, I said it.
You guys need to stop. You have made your points. Now GGIIIITTT OOOUUT [South Park reference lol]
beanbag641 1 week ago
@beanbag641 SPAM?? See...thats what I mean, you guys are all about random aggression and name calling. You have absolutely no relevance, you're about the pack dog mentality. If you make a point worth responding to...I might make an effort, otherwise go watch south park...(southpark is a jewish production too right? Totally vile and random bull sh*t from what i can see, just drivell on television))
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy lmao South Park isn't even a Jewish production you retard.
FYI South Park is a show designed to rip into idiots such as yourself.
Because look at you. Was I even being aggresive? lol you need to lay off youtube, your the one being the aggressor. you call people thugs yet you go round insulting the crap of people, generalising and discriminating them and yet you think your a justifier. More like a full of sh*t preacher
Go watch T.M.I. Grow a dick while you're at it.
beanbag641 1 week ago
I really think many of these pro circ guys are just posting out of bravado. go to any foreskin restoration forum and you will see the true thoughts of these sexless, dried out, hardened, stumpy dicks. Frustrated, full of sadness and loss and regret for what they lost.
I too feel sorry for them. Take heart, there is a tool that you can use to "stretch" your remaining skin to access some protection from bacteria.. Over time, you can get some sensitivity back.
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy ".....sexless, dried out, hardened, stumpy dicks......full of sadness and loss and regret...." Into transference, much?
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago 2
@KaneLongTroy lol I even don't agree with circumcism and I find you and your friends annoying. I don't think anybody here likes you at all. I think thats saying something. Do yoursef a favour and go get a life. Go socialize with people. It won't do you any harm
beanbag641 1 week ago
@beanbag641
Gee, trying to educate people is now a popularity contest? Way too often the truth is not popular--especially when it comes to infant genital mutilation.
Tandykane 1 week ago
CIRCUMCISION AND THE RISE OF VIOLENT CRIME INC. RAPE
According to neuro psychologist James Prescott, a study correlates directly violent crime and the rise of sexually active circumcised males in society..
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
C0nc0rdance, why don't you explain to us why you didn't mention that the foreskin is the most sensitive part of the entire penis? Sorrells et al. (2007) BJU.
Then in your next video you compare the foreskin to the tonsils. Are the tonsils the most sexually sensitive part of a mans body?
What you have done here is called lying by omission, and you've done so in such a way that supports violating others rights. That is despicable. Correct your video like a true scientist or you are the denialist
getrealrubberseal 1 week ago 31
@getrealrubberseal The Sorrells 2007 paper has been called into question by a umber of other peer-reviewed journals (AUA, BUA etc) and the hype about the foreskin being the most sensitive part is highly questionable anyway: it cannot be proven. In your 2nd sentence you put words into his mouth by mis-associating what he said in a different context. Desperate much? You have accused someone of violating 'rights': C0nc0rdance has done NO such thing.
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago
@TheTradWarrior, sorry to butt in, but I'm wondering if you know what you are talking about! I'm not aware of any journal called the AUA or BUA, so I'm at a loss as to how the Sorrells' study could have received criticism from that quarter, without a miraculous intervention..
If the AUA stands for "American Urology Association", that is not a journal, and moreover, I don't believe the association (or any other) has commented on the study.
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@dandydosbest 1] Oh my lord. I don't remember even replying to you. Lol, you think that just because I was 12 years old I am not a reference? Listen dude, I used to wack off before I was 12. And I also wacked off after my circumcision. Having an orgasm was the SAME feeling. Lol, as if YOU know the details of MY penis, but if you must know: my orgasm feels alot more stronger the more I last wacking off. Alot more sperm comes out and it's much less viscous. Try and debunk that.
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@SkyCoil
Gee, now I am conflicted-- am I to believe some illogical claims by someone on the internet, or science and logic..
Tandykane 1 week ago
@SkyCoil, don't doubt for a minute that many boys die from their circumcision wound in Africa and other third world countries, just as circumcised girls do (perhaps about equally for both genders, since conditions are the same)! Complications from male newborn (or infant) circumcisions in western countries are well documented, although I'm not sure about associated deaths. But I don't think that "death" should be the only criterion for significant complication or harm.
dandydosbest 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dandydosbest
"Complications from male newborn (or infant) circumcisions in western countries are well documented, although I'm not sure about associated deaths."
Complications are hardly WELL documented--only those during and immediately after circumcision--most complications show up later and they are ignored.
There are quite a few DOCUMENTED deaths from circumcision..also just ignored.
Tandykane 1 week ago
@dandydosbest 2] If the cultures from different regions in the world all simultaneously came up with the idea for circumcision, doesn't it mean there was a former and similiar reason to undergo it? This was probably caused by the small percentage that needed it to be done due to medical issues with their foreskins. I presume that depending on whatever culture, circumcism grew into a traditional act due to either religion, representation of machismo or libido, abstinence or hygiene.
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@dandydosbest 3] Not saying that either of those cultural reasons are necessarily correct or nay, but to be fair, it doesn't cause rediculous harm either. No one gets killed from it, really. Big f**king deal. But here you are wasting your damn time (and mine) dedicating it into being a anti-circumcision activist. Finally, I feel sorry for you, but hey - that's what you're passionate about I guess, I can't question it. Spend your time enjoying it then good for you. Just leave me be.
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@SkyCoil
Thanks for your version of the history of circumcision, but I really would like a rational and PROVEN justification for it.
Spare your pity for the victims of it.
Leave you alone??? Ever thought of just leaving?
Tandykane 1 week ago
@Tandykane "@SkyCoil, ..........ever thought of just leaving?"
Oh dear, TK.......yet another sane person has caught on and disagreed with you! Of course you want him to stop posting and go away. There are more and more of us fed up with all the 'anti' bullshit. You can't stop people saying what they want to say: it's our democratic right; our 'human right'. Heh-heh.
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago 2
@TheTradWarrior
Did you even bother to READ his posts? He was complaining about us responding to this posts and getting notices in his inbox.. so if that bothered him, I suggested he leave--I did not tell him to leave--hell, I want all of your here, it is so easy to debunk your evidence-free subjective "knowledge".
Tandykane 1 week ago
@SkyCoil
"No one gets killed from it, really. Big f**king deal" REALLY? There is an estimated 230 infants who die from it in the US alone--and many more hundreds in the rest of the world.
Would like some DOCUMENTED cases?
NOW, how is it silly or a waste of time to try preventing these senseless deaths?
Tandykane 1 week ago
@Tandykane agreed, Prescot claims the number is 1 out of 500,000, sheesh, I dont care who you are, losing ur kid even in 1 in a million shot for such a pointless and harmful cosmetic procedure would be a "no brainer" to avoid.
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@Tandykane Yeh but, how many of those cases include the child having an outside health error that merely required a circumcision as a trigger? Exactly.
And hey, if you really want the harsh truth: the more humans die via fatalities or are prevented from being born actually helps the human race as a whole from reaching extinction. It's a tad off topic there, but...
Ever thought of just not replying to me? I didn't message you. You 3 idiots just keep on barraging my inbox with crap.
SkyCoil 1 week ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@SkyCoil
"how many of those cases include the child having an outside health error that merely required a circumcision as a trigger?"
Well, then if this is your excuse, then you need to provide evidence for it.
Incidentally, "in Oslo, Norway, over a 26-year period in which 20,000 male babies were cared for, 3 circumcisions were performed-a frequency rate of 0.02%.
Ever thought that if you don't want people to refute your claims, that you just not post here?--just a thought.
Tandykane 1 week ago
@SkyCoil
BTW, most of those deaths were the DIRECT result of the circumcision, and the remainder would not have occurred if not for the circumcision.. simple logic:
NO circumcisions= NO deaths!
Tandykane 1 week ago
@SkyCoil With these 3 idiots, I suppose we must tread a fine line between putting our case so that dickheads like Jessica Tandy, KaneLongTroy and TlcTugger and others don't rule the net and get everything their way, and frankly, not wanting to feed the trolls.....
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago 2
@TheTradWarrior
Hmm, trolls are people who post to disrupt--sorta what you guys are doing--cause you arecertainly not posting anything of substance.
Tandykane 1 week ago
@Tandykane - Yep! YOu're a troll. And you've been doing it for YEARS-
tell us: what productive, measurable, or meaningful difference has all of
your wasted time gone in all this? Yeah- nothing. Again- valid evidence
has been given- your inability to do anything about it (religious freedom, parental consent and privacy rights) and your inability to refute them (medical science) - is glaring. So- tell us: what power do you have to dictate to parents & medical teams what it is they "owe" you?
Alaska47Boy 1 week ago 2
@Alaska47Boy
So, still not proven reason for NT infant circumcision?
Still no specific legal citation for the "parental right" to force circumcision onto your children for your silly claims that there is one?
Just cruising through and dropping your usual feces?
Tandykane 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tandykane -Reasons and the medical literature showing benefits of
circumcision have been given- you have NOT refuted it. You've attempted
to claim a difference in pleasure, function, and performance between
circumcised and uncorcumsied males- you HAVE NOT shown that,
I have shown you the LAW which MEDICAL and LEGAL professionals
That's NOT a citation. will continue to defend a parent's RIGHT TO
CHOOSE this medical procedure, you HAVE NOT refuted it-
so tell us, Jessica: when will you?
Alaska47Boy 1 week ago
@Tandykane Perhaps you are psychologically damaged after all, and have problems accepting any data or views that conflict with your own. You're in denial.
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago 2
@TheTradWarrior
So, you believe that one believing in and following the scientific process as it relates to evidence is psychologically damaged? This speaks more about you than those you try to disparage.
Tandykane 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tandykane - Only a moron like you would think it could only be one or the
other- and believe me, you're no authority to say what "speaks more" about
people, having no intellect, no upbringing, and no life experiences, except for
years and years of anti-choice internet trolling.
Alaska47Boy 5 days ago
@TheTradWarrior
So, do you wish to engage in an intelligent discussion or not?
If so, can you provide a valid REASON for NT infant circumcision or not?
Tandykane 1 week ago 2
@Tandykane I see three of your alter-egos have 'liked' this for you.
TheTradWarrior 4 days ago
@TheTradWarrior, I repost my recent comment to you:
"I'm not aware of any journal called the AUA or BUA, so I'm at a loss as to how the Sorrells' study could have received criticism from that quarter, without a miraculous intervention."
I wonder if you would care to address my comment to you, perhaps by correcting yourself, or is that too hard for you to do? You did make the statement that the "AUA" and "BUA etc." had cast doubt on Sorrells' findings, didn't you?
dandydosbest 1 week ago 2
@dandydosbest Now then little lady, now then! Don't get above yourself. AUA and BUA do in fact stand for the American Urology Association and the British Urology Association, and both of them quoted refutations of the Sorrells 2007 "study" as being fundamentally flawed. Besides that see the Blaustein reports of 2003 & 2007, Siegfried et al 2003, Auvert et al 2005, and usaid.gov/foreskin//circ.
TheTradWarrior 4 days ago 2
@TheTradWarrior, you just get funnier! First, you said that the "AUA" and "BUA" were "journals". Once I corrected you, they turn into associations!
The problem for you is that the "BUA" does not even exist as an association! And although the "AUA" is an organisation, it has never commented on Sorrels' study.
But if you claim that your two presumed associations DID criticise Sorrells, please provide me the reference for their comments, and quote them too!
Is my request not reasonable enough?
dandydosbest 4 days ago
@dandydosbest The acid tones disguised as "honeyed" that you employ make any 'request' of yours and anything else you say deeply unreasonable. In spite of being a health professional you really know very little of importance and are only concerned with your own prejudices.
I suspect that you are just a troll who has jumped on the phoney "human rights" wagon and milking it for all it is worth. If you went to Cheltenham Ladies College, then you should favour the circumcised not the stinkywinkies
TheTradWarrior 4 days ago
@TheTradWarrior
So, this is your last resort in lieu of any actual evidence?
Amazing how little circumcisers know about the subject and how completely unable they are to defend it with actual evidence.
Tandykane 4 days ago 2
@TheTradWarrior, "stinkywinkies" are people who don't wash!
Cheltenham Ladies College girls admire men who have the self-respect to wash, and are proud of the natural male body. I feel sorry for men whose penis was altered to suit the dictates of their parents.
I certainly wouldn't want such presumptious, arrogant parents as in-laws.
dandydosbest 4 days ago
@dandydosbest Oh don't be so stupid! For your information, nobody's asking you or indeed considering you as in-laws anyway! Upper and middle class girls prefer the glorious look of a circumcised penis on a man, as that's what they are used to and expect from that class of men. We are proud to be circumcised and will not accept any politically correct bullshit from certain sections of the National Health Service who would make us see otherwise. Cut is the way to go despite all the anti propaganda
TheTradWarrior 3 days ago 2
Comment removed
dandydosbest 3 days ago
@TheTradWarrior, no true-blooded Englishman circumcises sons, only Muslims and twisted Jews do it.
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO ADMIT YOU LIED IN YOUR CLAIM THAT THE "AUA" AND BUA (sic!) EXPRESSED ANY OPINION ON THE SORRELL'S STUDY?
An Englishman can admit when he is wrong. You cannot! You are neither a gentleman nor an Englishman. You are a fool, who just wallows in ignorance and fatuous pride. You are tedious and dull, and that's all that emerges from all your remarks.
dandydosbest 3 days ago
@dandydosbest Do not presume to SHOUT at me. Did you even bother to read my post of a day ago? Have you not UNDERSTOOD any of C0nc0rdance's video and the facts - FACTS - stated therein? Don't give me any rubbish such as "no true-blooded Englishman circumcises sons", as this is patently untrue, and you know it! You're just revealing your ignorance. Nor should you refer to 'only Muslims & "twisted" Jews' as you are showing your racist side!
You are only a nurse, and not a doctor. (cont)
TheTradWarrior 3 days ago
@dandydosbest (2) Not that the British medical 'establishment is up to much these days. If you truly believe in your medical status, then you should be properly trained to care for patients with skill, knowledge, kindness, compassion and use of common sense, rather than all the paperwork and dubious "courses" you're sent on these days and all the box-ticking that requires. Then, maybe patients in NHS hospitals wont be dying on trolleys waiting hours to be seen.
TheTradWarrior 3 days ago
@dandydosbest (3) So, little lady, don't presume to lecture me on minor points when there is so much lacking in your own 'profession'. See the bigger picture, acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, you don't know everything, and stop lecturing others on issues on which you do not have a right to hold an opinion! Do you NOW start to see that you picked a fight with the wrong person? I walk in circles around you.
TheTradWarrior 3 days ago
@TheTradWarrior, YOU presented no facts, just error, which your pride won't allow you to correct in a noble fashion. A true Englishman has honour and fair play.You have neither, AND no argument!
As for Concordance, his video presents very few "FACTS" (as I'm sure he would admit). Experimental data aren't facts, and moreover are contradicted by other data. He reckons ca.10% of men will need circumcision (baloney!), yet then says Finns are less than 2% circumcised! So, WHICH one is fact, genius?!
dandydosbest 3 days ago
@dandydosbest He has given facts & stats and left his own viewpoint on the sidelines. You're taking two independent strands of his video and mixing them up to suit your own argument, and at that, not very effectively. As a woman, you are not qualified to have an opinion on this issue. This is not a YT strand promoted by so-called "intactivists" where you all run with each others' batons, so if you don't like what people say, then you are free to leave.....and mind your own business.
TheTradWarrior 3 days ago
@TheTradWarrior, you say that as a woman I am not qualified to express an opinion on circumcision.
So, do you criticise the millions of American mothers who sign up their sons to be circumcised each year? Do you think that circumcising sons should be left to the father's choice, and that women should butt out?
Do you have a position on female circumcision?
dandydosbest 1 day ago
@dandydosbest Why do you want to know?? No, I don't really have a stance on female circumcision. But, like most women, you are mixing up two different issues and then making your point. Female circumcision doesn't really have a medical, hygiene, religious or aesthetic reason, and I gather that in African culture, the clit is totally excised, leaving no clitoral stimulation (obviously); a bit like chopping off the entire penis, so no, I don't agree with it, but as I said it's a different issue.
TheTradWarrior 1 day ago
@TheTradWarrior
You are confusing the CLAIMS of benefits for male circumcision with actually having PROVEN benefits..hence your arguments fall completely apart--but don;t let reality interfere with your fantasies.
More reality for you:Female circumcision does not reduce sexual activity
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (vol 109, p 1089)
BTW,
Tandykane 1 day ago
@dandydosbest (2) Fyi, no, I don't criticise American mothers who sign their sons up to be done, as they're on the right side of the argument.I know just what you're about though, so don't even TRY that one on me; and don't give me any more of this silly nonsense about human rights.
TheTradWarrior 1 day ago
@TheTradWarrior
"they're on the right side of the argument" REALLY? Then why are you unable to supply ANY evidence to support your claim--or any to refute the opposite claim--a warrior without a weapon.
Tandykane 1 day ago
@TheTradWarrior, you mean you "walk in circles" around a discussion or argument! That's all you can do.
dandydosbest 3 days ago
@dandydosbest Words are cheap.....you are merely flailing about and posturing.
TheTradWarrior 3 days ago
@TheTradWarrior
Yes, words are cheap--that seems to be why you use so many and no evidence.
Sorry but the claim of impartiality of the author is nonsense, it is cherry-picked and in denial of the empirical evidence.
Tandykane 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tandykane - The evidence has been given- medical, legal, moral- why is it
that you are so unable to refute an iota of it, Jessica?
Alaska47Boy 2 days ago
@TheTradWarrior
Curious that you believe me to be psychologically damaged because I do NOT advocate the mutilation of helpless infants--it is much more logical to think those doing so are the ones psychologically damaged. Perhaps projection is at work?
Tandykane 1 week ago 2
Comment removed
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@TheTradWarrior Agreed.
What's funny is these trolls don't realise that they only feed on their own insecurities sugarcoated by temporary satisfaction. However we must remember not to stoop down to their level. I mean, look at me. I'm not even the type of person to argue, but these people (person?) just...
It's like beanbag said, they're practically spambots: they work by a one way argument; they only spurt out crap and never absorb. And they reak of hypocrisy.
Take it steady.
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@SkyCoil
So, no one here is able to provide a single proven reason for NT infant circumcision?
I though not..just the usual diversionary crap.
Tandykane 1 week ago
@Tandykane Dw, this is my last message - depleted of patience, I admit. In the end of the day, you're just a bunch of failed terrorists. Not in the sense of morality, but rather in a sense that as activists, you aren't affective. If you hate circumcision so much (which according to your channels, you really do; wouldn't be surprised if you three are the same person), then do something that'll really make the nation stutter, rather than being a bunch of Youtube trolls nobody likes.
SkyCoil 1 week ago 2
@SkyCoil
Depleted of patience, or depleted of justification for harming infants..?
Just terrorists? Why not trot out some Nazi nonsense? Might as well leave with a bang.
Tandykane 1 week ago
Comment removed
SacrificialScapeGoat 1 week ago
Comment removed
SacrificialScapeGoat 1 week ago
@SacrificialScapeGoat I notice how many of you are aggressive little name calling thugs. You all mostly get personal at the drop of a hat. Its the brain cell deterioration. Makes you futile in your arguments
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
Comment removed
SacrificialScapeGoat 1 week ago
@SacrificialScapeGoat heh...tootdles, you guys just cant comment without resorting to some sort of name calling. My guess is an overall general sense of frustration. And ur free to leave any time. How does your staying to waffle in any way affect me. Just stop posting...easy.
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
Comment removed
SacrificialScapeGoat 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy
This is your best attempt at a rational rebuttal?
Accuse others of name-calling and then turn right around and call them names--hypocrisy is still alive, I see.
Tandykane 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy Aggressive little name calling thugs? Bit rich coming from you! "....sexless,dried out, hardened, stumpy dicks..........frustrated, full of sadness and loss..." WE'RE getting personal??
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago 2
@TheTradWarrior, hi there again! You seem to be giving us intactivists a hard time (you're running with your friend's baton, I think). We intactivists had better ensure we get our facts right. We don't always.
psandbergnz 1 week ago
@TheTradWarrior
So, when can we expect you to provide a rational, ethical, and PROVEN justification for NT infant circumcision--this insults, taunts, and name-calling is way beyond BORING!
Tandykane 1 week ago
@SkyCoil "No one gets killed from it"
Except for, you know, the children that have been killed by it.
RockoMyler 1 week ago 2
@TheTradWarrior
No "Journal" has put the Sorrells paper into question. Two insane men (Jake & Brian) wrote a letter claiming their was a problem with the data regarding the glans. No problem with the data regarding the foreskin. However, this letter from these two insane men was refuted in two follow up letters.
Why is the fact that the foreskin is the most sensitive part questionable? Why the denial? This has been known for thousands of years. Every intact man knows this, ask.
getrealrubberseal 1 week ago
@TheTradWarrior
No "Journal" has put the Sorrells paper into question. Two insane men (Jake & Brian) wrote a letter claiming their was a problem with the data regarding the glans. No problem with the data regarding the foreskin. However, this letter from these two insane men was refuted in two follow up letters.
Why is the fact that the foreskin is the most sensitive part questionable? Why the denial? This has been known for thousands of years. Every intact man knows this, ask
getrealrubberseal 1 week ago
(cont) if the information for risk and reward of the procedure all originated within the same area as I would assume the medical risk is higher in a country with less developed medical treatment. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
OneSidedEquilibria 1 week ago
@C0nc0rdance Hi there I was watching this and one thing that struck me regarding the data to complications, the information you show has the implication that the medical benefits are greater then the medical disadvantages. On this I was thinking is this not slightly biased as the medical information seems to be taken from treatment in the US etc however the risk factors they are preventing are mostly in less developed countries would it not be more balanced (cont)
OneSidedEquilibria 1 week ago
@OneSidedEquilibria
Actually, he fails to address the PROVEN risks altogether.. he ignores the studies that show the real rate of complications (minor and catastrophic)--and completely ignores the risk of unnecessary deaths--even in "civilized" countries.
Tandykane 1 week ago
I'm opposed to non-medically necessary coercive/forced circs for children, especially when based on cultural/religious dogma. Instead, we should increase condom use & testing, and encourage informed consent at an age approaching sexual activity.
emilyhasbooks 1 week ago
Comment removed
Nazareeni 1 week ago
In fact...wouldnt the baseless knowledge that a modified knob actually incites and encourages reckless sexual behavior? "I cant get aids...because I got no foreskin" "I can dip it into anything and Im safe" The idea that carving off the skin actually protects you, actually promotes the dirty behavior that creates more disease. The entire arguement is hillarious from every practical aspect.
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
I've had circumcision at the age of 12. When it comes to orgasms, nothing changes. Nothing. And theoretically losing 20,000 nerve endings means you'd last alot longer in bed =P.
Also this maybe due to well timed puberty, but after the circumsision I definately remember the girth of my penis being bigger, especially in flacid mode. Note it took around 2 months for my penis to heal, and longer until every grain of stitch disappeared, so again this could be just puberty giving me some beefcake.
SkyCoil 2 weeks ago
@SkyCoil hehe, in mick jjaggers words "I cant get no...satisfaction" Your girlfriend probably starts mentally writing her shopping list while ur at it. Wasnt there a study done in the 70's indicating the majority of violent crime as inordinately perpetrated by circumcised males. You wont get satisfaction but leave your sons alone.
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
@KaneLongTroy I can tolerate people lecturing me on a subject, infact I could agree with them & respect their opinion and effort regardless, however you need to be addressed personally.
First off, why the insults? Are you THAT sensitive to the issue? What happened? Did your father decide you would be circumcised as a baby, and an intern accidentally cut off your glans penis?
Why bring crime into the debate? Wtf? Were you molseted by a circumcised man as a child? Take a chill pill.
SkyCoil 1 week ago 2
@SkyCoil yes i was molested as a child...so? ...wait a minute...arent we both fighting against this ridiculous jewish custom? Why are you swinging lol
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy Oh. Sorry dude. Tbf this circumcision debate has gone too in depth for my taste. I'm usually more observatory, but I just wanted to throw in a small bone, like everyone else I thought would. But it seems plenty more people find this subject to be an alarming and delicate one at that. I had no idea. For that, I'm out.
Keep it steady. Happy trails to you, until we meet again =P.
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@SkyCoil wow what a dip sh*t
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@KaneLongTroy Huh? What did I do now? I feel sorry for you.
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@SkyCoil, non-therapeutic infant circumcision is a crime. It flies against a person's right to autonomy (making one's own choices) and phsyical integrity. If it is a crime to perform any kind of genital cutting on girls, why would the same prinicple not apply to boys? Non-therapeutic circumcision is not a medical procedure. To be medical (rather than cosmetic), you would have to have good evidence that it has a net medical benefit, i.e. benefit is greater than harm or risk of harm.
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@SkyCoil
The Scandinavians found that cut men have PE more often than normal men.
In a study investigating the adequacy of condom sizes, Richters, Gerofi, and Donovan noted that circumcised men had significantly shorter erect penises by a mean length of 8mm than genitally intact men (p<.05). The difference in erect penile size was attributed to insufficient skin to accomodate the erection.
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
@Tandykane - Bogus citation, please. There has never been lower rates of any
affliction caused by circumcision, and no medical data supports your bullshit
claim that there is a difference in pleasure, performance, or function between
circumcised and uncircumcised males. Come back when you're less full of shit.
Alaska47Boy 1 week ago
@Alaska47Boy
Better yet, how about you coming back when you have something of substance in support of NY infant circumcision instead of the tired old games you have been playing... like a proven necessity for it, like PROVEN benefits and a justification for the PROVEN harm, inherent risks and the justification for the violation of their basic human rights.
BTW, you might wish to consider SCIENTIFIC evidence, and not bogus "medical evidence".
Tandykane 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tandykane - That's NOT a citation. I have shown the medical literature
showing benefits of circumcision- you have NOT refuted it. You have
attempted to claim a difference in pleasure, function, and performance
between circumcised and uncorcumsied males- you HAVE NOT shown that,
and I have shown you the LAW which MEDICAL and LEGAL professionals
will continue to defend a parent's RIGHT TO CHOOSE this medical procedure,
and you HAVE NOT refuted it- so tell us, Jessica: when will you?
Alaska47Boy 1 week ago
Comment removed
Nazareeni 1 week ago
@Tandykane It's cool how...passionate you are about the subject, digging through the recessess to find any kind of statistic information that will try and contradict my own penis. There's no need to desperately try & throw me or the uploader off balance here; remember that every individual is unique and I'm merely stating my own experiences, and kudos to the uploader since he's discussed this situation whilst being completely unbiased, unlike yourself. No offense, I'm not against you.
SkyCoil 1 week ago
@SkyCoil
But the problem is, facts and evidence exist, and if your claims are counter to them, they cannot be considered credible.
Bias is your latest argument, then how can you believe the uploader when he has ignored the empirical evidence that counter his claim--his bias is cherry-picking and ignoring stronger evidence?
Tandykane 1 week ago
@Tandykane Also, those statistics aren't relevant. I said mine improved girth-wise, not length =P.
Ts'all good. Keep it up & have a nice day ^.^
SkyCoil 1 week ago 2
@SkyCoil
Sorry, but insufficient to allow for full expansion would also logically reduce the girth--so the stats logically apply here also.
Tandykane 1 week ago
@Tandykane I feel sorry for you, too.
SkyCoil 1 week ago 2
@SkyCoil
Sorry for me---why is that? Is it because you assume that I am a victim of MGM?
Tandykane 1 week ago
@Tandykane "The Scandinavians found that cut men....etc". First off, 'Scandinavians' comprise four different countries: who do you mean? Secondly, they would say that as they are traditionally a non-circumcising culture, so have an axe to grind in that respect.
@SkyCoil: Of course this is a bogus citation: dig deeper and you'll find that Tandykane is full of them, while always decrying the results of studies that do not comply with his views.
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago
@TheTradWarrior
This is your concept of what a rebuttal is? The Scandinavians have an axe to grind? What axe are you talking about--NOT mutilating penises?
Please provide evidence for this claim of it being a "bogus" study.
Tandykane 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Again I am familiar with these Lake flooded countries. It can easily be seen on maps of these countries. Here is the data again.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Country,% infected circumcised Men, % infected uncircumcised men: Major Lakes
Cameroon --4.1cir 1.1n-cir Lakes: Lagdo, Mbakaou, Chad, Dejerem, Sanaga
Gana-- 1.6cir 1.4n-cir Lake Valta, bui
Lesotho-- 22.8cir 15.2n-cir
Malawi-- 13.2cir 9.5n-cir Lakes: Nyasa
Rwanda-- 3.5cir 2.1n-cir Lakes: Kivu, Cohaha, Bulera, Ihema, Rweru
Swaziland-- 21.8cir 19.5n-cir
Tanzania-- 6.5cir 5.6n-cir Lakes: Nyasa, Victoria, Tanganyika, Malawi
Cas77b 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Im not directing this to anyone specifically, but can we at least agree that the old "health" argument for circumcision is a mute point. You wouldnt remove your brain because you can get a tumor or remove your eyelids because you might get an infection. Isnt this a logical argument and if so, why are still people blaming the normal god given penis for the individuals poor hygiene or bad sex partner choices.
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
Im not directing this to anyone specifically, but can we at least agree that the old "health" argument for circumcision is a mute point. You wouldnt remove your brain because you can get a tumor or remove your eyelids because you might get an infection. Isnt this a logical argument and if so, why are still people blaming the normal god given penis for the individuals poor hygiene or bad sex partner choices.
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
How did this debauchery go from a quaint little jewish custom, obscure...weird and "nauseating" ...to a medically valid procedure that is almost imperative in many christians minds...how?
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
The point is this is an ancient Jewish practice. Why the world is following the dictates of a small "sect like" religion (compared to the population of christians) and butchers the male human phallus in young children is a question worth studying and the answer worth pursuing.- Its ludicrous...fine for jews but why is the western world doing it.
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
Freakin hilarious, you're ALL broken and cut and lost and you simply want others to support your new condition without a real penis. Eat ur position and stop mauling ur kids. simple. A real penis has a protective covering thaT doubles as an exclusively sensual device for heightened pleasure. YOU DONT HAVE THAT...go join a foreskin restoration forum and cry with the others!!!
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
@KaneLongTroy, right, and Christians don't circumcise. St. Paul said it had "no value" (letter to the Galatians). As I wearily point out to some Christians, particularly from the USA, there's no such thing as a "Christian" circumcision (who would do it - a mohel?!), and hospital circumcisions have no religious significance.
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@psandbergnz Yes but often you have to make allowances for Americans. They are a country of individuals freedom based and can do whatever they wish...even if its totally stupid. The next step is lopping of the knob itself...now we really got hygiene...hahahaha, or ball sack removal. The scrotum gets all sweaty in summer...surely that would be "smart" too? Im sure there would be a doctor to recommend it if the procedure was lucrative...hahaha
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
@KaneLongTroy Wow, you're a total douchebag. I mean quite honestly, you seem to have an elitist attitude towards something that someone cannot change.
AdamTehBoss 2 weeks ago 2
@AdamTehBoss, just to butt in: so how are we supposed to discourage dumbass parents (esp. those from the USA) from subjecting their baby boys to this unnecessary and traumatic procedure? WATCH a baby boy being circumcised, if only on Youtube (if you dare). How can this NOT be described as a debauchery? This is still happening to the majority of U.S. boys.
dandydosbest 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dandydosbest Hahahah. I'm not snipped & my views on it are unsure, but your attitude seems typical of an anti-circumcision wack-job. Considering you apparently know how his junk works more than himself perhaps you, KaneLongTroy and TandyKane should all kneel down and suck his cock for him.
Nazareeni 1 week ago 10
@AdamTehBoss Typical moron response, if you cant think of an effective rebuttal, call them names. I have made several relevant and insightful arguments and all you can think of is to call me a name, what a genius
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
@KaneLongTroy You're not even sure which comment I was replying to, are you? I was replying to the one that referred to circumcised men as "broken and cut and lost", which to me, was offensive. You also said something along the lines of, "go join a foreskin restoration forum and cry with the others!!!!!" Which to me, sounds like a total douchebag. I hadn't read any of your other comments, and I didn't feel as though I needed to. I stand by my comment, you're a total douchebag.
AdamTehBoss 1 week ago 2
@KaneLongTroy Why would anyone fortunate and civilised enough to have been circumcised WANT to 'restore' ? It's a useless bit of flangy, potentially dirt-encrusted skin that is unattractive to ladies, and merely shows a working class background. Ugh. Fail.
TheTradWarrior 1 week ago
@TheTradWarrior LOL women? Yes I agree with you, 4 out of 5 crack whores inevitably agree with you.
KaneLongTroy 1 week ago
@TheTradWarrior
Thanks for the BS that circumcised men resort to to defend their damaged penis..WHY you ask?
BRITISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Volume 77, Pages 291-295,February 1996.
The prepuce: Specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision
by J.R. Taylor, A.P. Lockwood and A.J. Taylor
Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis Morris L. Sorrells, James L. Snyder, Mark D. Reiss 2 0 07 BJU INTERNATIONAL 2007
Tandykane 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tandykane - No one's "defending" anything, you moron- YOU are attacking
anyone who chooses this medical procedure, and have demonstrated NO
difference whatsoever in pleasure, function, or performance between
circumcised and uncircumcised males. The Taylor study states
"NO attempt was made to quantify the specialized nerve endings."
This study shows tissue, it DOESN'T mention of sensory loss- nor of
function or performance of the penis. Once again- Try again, you
fucking liar.
Alaska47Boy 1 week ago
Also, any women that do not crave that soft, luscious foreskin with its delicious suppleness, must use hard, cold plastic dildos for recreation and desire that same plastic experience with a real penis, get back to your plastic ladies, a real penis is delicate and yummy, not a helmet head dried out lump of "woody" meat.
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
@KaneLongTroy, good point. But cirumcision is now uncommon throughout Europe. It's certainly not the norm here to circumcise infants or newborns. We're not like the USA! I believe that evidence shows that the Philippines began their obsession for circumcision in the 20th century, as the USA swamped your culture.
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@psandbergnz (Im not philippino, was just there at the time I opened this account-Im australian with euro origins) Yes I agree that in Europe they are actually normal. This video seems to establish one main premise. Including all the people here debating for circumcisions. That is that the natural normal state of a male sex organ is actually diseased in some way and requires some medical assistance to get it "right"
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
I am christian, Im not a jew, so hmm...WTF...why is half of the western world clipping their kids following the religious dictates of a "marginAL" religion. My Jewish doctor once told me with enthusiasm that I should consider it. I am sure they laugh at us gentiles and find great satisfaction that they are "reforming" Christianity into Judaism-This is not hate based, just an observation.
KaneLongTroy 2 weeks ago
Familiar with these tiny Lake flooded African countries. Here is a list with the data and the lakes look at any map of these tiny lands and see them overflowing with fresh water systems. Sub Saharan Africa is the water poor land the CDC is referring to getting one life saved from HIV for every four Circumcision a good return. Please YouTube search “CDC targeting paths to HIV prevention” and hear it for yourself.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago
@Cas77b, and why should the CDC's views trump those held by medical associations elsewhere? Where's your evidence that in your nation (USA) STDs are commoner in "uncut" men than the "cut"?
Circumcision evidently hasn't done much for the USA (80% circ'd!): USA has the highest level of STDs/HIV out of the developed nations (where circumcision is generally uncommon). Your own CDC says this.
Researcher Michel Garenne (Pasteur Institute) calls circumcision in Africa "a dangerous distraction".
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@Cas77b
Considering your water availablility hypothesis, where do the USA and European countries and Japan fit?
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
The US and Europe parallel each other in general with close HIV rates. The CDC report is that gay men in the US are not using condoms and have a slightly higher rate of HIV. The Japanese have always valued the use of public baths. Unlike the rest of the industrialized world were plumbing is only about a hundred years old.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago
@Cas77b
Soory, but the US has on average 6X the HIV rate as Europe and Japan.
Unless the CDC can account with hard numbers for the complee failure of circumcision to REDUCE HIV, they are merely fishing for excuses--SCIENCE does not accept excuses.
Plumbing is only 100 years old--how old is HIV?
So, when are you going to refute the CDC study showing undamaged epithelia does not transmit the virus. I don't want to hear some speculation..EVIDENCE,
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
DC-SIGN cells are sacrificial rather than dieing in the skin when infected with fungi and virus they are transported into the body. The reduction in their cell structure triggers their destruction by the immune system. This offers the body some protection from fungus, but also in time transmission of some diseases like HIV. So wash after sex.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago
@Tandykane The history is that in sub Saharan Africa some populations circumcise, and some neighboring populations do not. The circumcised population have half the HIV rate this has lead to over twenty years and over 40 studies on fore skin and HIV. It is believed that DC-SIGN cells transport HIV from the inner unkeratinized foreskin to the immune system.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago
@Cas77b says: "The circumcised popoulation [Sub-Sahara] have half the HIV rate".
That is a false generalisation! There is huge inconsistency in findings. EXPLAIN THIS!:
USAID report 2009 "Levels and Spread of HIV" investigated EIGHTEEN 3rd World countries (nearly all Sub-Saharan) for HIV against male circumcision status. Results were a "mixed picture". In fact, in TEN of those 18 countries, HIV was higher in the CIRCUMCISED men (as % population). Google the USAID report (p.109).
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@Cas77b, also explain the findings by researcher Michel Garenne (Pasteur Institute), published in the peer-reviewed "African Journal of AIDs Research" in 2008. Garenne investigated HIV/circumcision data from thirteen African countries. He found a "mixed bag" of results: in over 3 countries (e.g. Cameroon, Lesotho, Malawi), the CIRCUMCISED men actually had more HIV (as % pop.) than the intact, and in SEVEN, there was no difference!
He conludes that circumcsion is not a useful strategy.
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@Cas77b
BELIEF? What about PROOF.
Spare me this silly "population group" argument--supply hard numbers.
OVERALL, either circumcision ALWAYS reduces HIV or it does not--SCIRNCE demands fulfillment of prediction..a sometimes existence does not fly.
Provide a solid accounting with hard numbers for the numerous failures, and spare me the nebulous EXCUSES for failures.
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
Country,% infected circumcised Men, % infected uncircumcised men: Major Lakes
Cameroon --4.1cir 1.1n-cir Lakes: Lagdo, Mbakaou, Chad, Dejerem, Sanaga
Gana-- 1.6cir 1.4n-cir Lake Valta, bui
Lesotho-- 22.8cir 15.2n-cir
Malawi-- 13.2cir 9.5n-cir Lakes: Nyasa
Rwanda-- 3.5cir 2.1n-cir Lakes: Kivu, Cohaha, Bulera, Ihema, Rweru
Swaziland-- 21.8cir 19.5n-cir
Tanzania-- 6.5cir 5.6n-cir Lakes: Nyasa, Victoria, Tanganyika, Malawi
Cas77b 2 weeks ago
Ok so I'm 12 and I am only watching this because I am thinking about being circumsized and I don't know what to think I don't really understand this but I get it a little can you send me anyone a message about any thing I should know??? Thank you
zombiescod1 2 weeks ago
@zombiescod1, why are you considering circumcision? It may be helpful for you to watch the Youtube video: "Why circumcision is unnecessary" by John Travis MD. I think it is wise to choose circumcision only if recommended by one or more doctors. If you have a foreskin problem, there may be alternative treatments to consider. Your doctor should know how to advise you about these.
dandydosbest 2 weeks ago
Washing after sex also works because absorption takes time. Circumcision is best done as an infant were no stitches are needed. Healing is like a paper cut. At your age infection is a risk, and you know to wash after sex instead. Also, always use a condom when you do become sexually active to get the greatest protection. If you want this as body modification and your parents approve a doctor may consider doing it.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago 3
@Cas77b
Unless you can provide proof for any benefit for NT circumcision, the best time to do it is never.
Now, you are going to have to do better than making some unsupported assertion about healing to justify infant circumcision. You have to PROVE it is necessary in the first place, and THEN how is better as an infant.
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
@zombiescod1 Dear 12 year old this subject is a mine field of lies by intactavists, people against male circumcision. They try to make the data sound questionable, but circumcision works. That’s why if you google “Bono and Circumcision” you will find it is world aid policy to Africa.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago 3
@Cas77b, circumcision is a minefield of lies by circumcision advocates! A circumcision campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa is no evidence of its usefulness as preventative strategy in any developed nation (this boy is Canadian)! STD studies iinvestigating STDs and circumcision in developed nations find NO circumcision advantage. So what's your point?
No medical society recommends it as prophylaxis. Even the South African Medical Asssoc. denounces infant circumcison as "unethical and illegal".
dandydosbest 2 weeks ago
@Cas77b
"but circumcision works" REALLY?
not in the US, it hasn't vs the other industrialized counties, nor here:
There are six African countries where men are *more* likely to be HIV+ if they've been circumcised: Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Swaziland.
or even here: It investigates EIGHTEEN 3rd world countries for HIV and circumcision status (see p.109). It finds a “mixed picture”. In fact, in TEN of the 18 nations, HIV was HIGHER in the CIRCUMCISED men.
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
@Tandykane, the South African Medical Asssociation is skeptical of findings that circumcision protects from HIV (being in Africa, it should know!).
It put out a statement in June 2011 expressing "serious concern that not enough scientifically-based evidence was available to confirm that circumcision prevented HIV contraction, and that the public was being influenced by misrepresented information."
It added they "do not support circumcision to prevent HIV transmission.” (See online).
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@psandbergnz
The problem is that there is so many BOGUS claims that totally ignores the real world EMPIRICAL evidence that circumcision has not been able to provide any reduction in HIV is still being totally ignored.
People have this silly notion that flawed, questionable studies supersede any and all real world EMPIRICAL evidence that SCIENCE deems the highest form of evidence--that so-called "medical evidence" has more merit than REAL scientific.evidence.
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
@Tandykane, just to qualify: circumcision can protect from HIV in the event that foreskin is DAMAGED - by abrasion, cuts, infections (the same holds true if ANY part of the penis is harmed).That reason alone could account for the RCT results. NB. the men were randomised at the experimental level, NOT at the population level.
The RCT Control group (the "intact") were probably over-represented by foreskin problems - hence the men sought circumcision! That would bias the RCT results.
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@psandbergnz
And to further the argument, the authors did not control for the prevalence of "DRY SEX" which compounds the problems inherent in the study.
Hell, actually they didn't CONTROL for any factors, they just played statistical games with self-reporting, which is notoriously unreliable.
The basic problem with these studies is that they make claims that cannot be supported by REALITY--so unscientific!
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
@Tandykane, hence John Loannidis is correct about medical studies, i.e. most are unreliable. It is very hard to control for confounding factors, especially if there is expectation bias on the part of the researchers (this will tend to make them oblivious to the limitations of their study, and not address them). RCT circumcision studies are the HARDEST to do reliably! It's frustrating discussing with people who take medical studies as "reality", and even Concordance succombs to this.
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@psandbergnz
"It is very hard to control for confounding factors"
Correct, but it is more correct to say that outside of the laboratory it is IMPOSSIBLE to control for all factors..this is why it is disingenuous to call the African studies "RCT'S".
Sad to see that SCIENCE has been misappropriated by people with an agenda , and that they depend on people being ignorant of real science.
Tandykane 2 weeks ago
Tinny lake flooded African countries. Easily viewed by maps. We should expect a similar comparison between these countries and the US and Europe. Transmission of HIV is from the under the side of fore skin. Were sacrificial cells transmit it into the immune system. Not enough keratin to form a barrier. Washing and water is the difference. Wash after sex or circumcise.
Cas77b 2 weeks ago