Doctor Discusses Circumcision Controversy

James L. Snyder, M.D., F.A.C.S., Past President of the Virginia Urological Society discusses the controversy around infant circumcision. Conversation recorded in San Francisco, California July 29, 2010.

Warning: Medical photos of circumcision harm.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• botched
• circumcision
• controversy
• medical
• ethics
• sexual
• surgery
• phalloplasty
• infant
• human
• rights
• doctor
• nurse
• NCLEX
• male
• genital
• mutilation
• SF
• MGM
• Bill
• lawsuits

[hiImDay]

It's not medically necessary and I will never circumcise my sons. If they choose to have i done later in life fine. But my boys were born PERFECT. If you do it for religious reasons or because you feel it should be done. fine but, don't dis people who choose not to. There is no MEDICAL reason. There are religious and personal preferences to it. NONE ARE medial though.

[Bonobo3D]

@hiImDay Religious and "personal preferences" should be left entirely up to the only one it matters, the person whose body is in question.

[HyperHowie]

Unfortunately, you're all WRONG: Check out both the pending CDC recommendations, the recommendation by the Pediatric Doctor's Assn (finally, some commonsense)...and another by midwives.

[Bonobo3D]

@HyperHowie THe whole, healthy, natural human body, especially the genital organs (organs of reproduction) are not wrong. Genital cutting of children is wrong on every level.

[Bonobo3D]

@HyperHowie Forced circumcision is going the way of the lobotomy but not fast enough. People looking for validation to surgically mutilate the genitals of their children will find it. Thos who support this form of surgical child abuse will continue this social illness, however people are waking up.

[Bonobo3D]

@HyperHowie You're right in a weird way, your foreskin is no longer part of your penis if someone cuts it off.

However for 80% of the world's men their foreskin is very much a part of their penis (the most sensitive part) and they would fight you to make sure it stays that way.

[esymank22]

I could have done without watching this......

[forensicgirl]

An excellent and informative video-how could any parent consent to circumcision after watching this?

[SheSez]

@Cozzi0 Because someone in charge of you, didn't think it looked right... so they got it taken care of.

[neechee5150]

@HyperHowie "The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) believes that circumcision has potential medical benefits & advantages, as well as risks. The existing scientific evidence is NOT sufficient to recommend routine circumcision. Therefore, because the procedure is NOT essential to a child’s current well-being, we recommend that the decision to circumcise is one best made by parents in consultation with their pediatrician" AAP Where We Stand:Circumcision 12/21/11

[neechee5150]

@HyperHowie "Whatever the content[CDC recomendations on male circumcision] may include, CDC’s final circumcision recommendations will be completely voluntary. While CDC has NOT YET determined if male circumcision should be recommended for ANY population, ultimately the decision will rest with individuals and parents. CDC’s public health imperative is to provide the best possible information on the risks and benefits to help inform those decisions" Status of CDC Male Circumcision Recomendations

[Hugh7777]

@HyperHowie The CDC's recommendation has been pending for a long time - suggesting there's a lot of internal disagreement - and until it stops pending, we don't know what it is. Likewise the American Academy of Pediatrics, if that's what you mean. In 2010 they wanted to allow token ritual cutting of girls "much less extensive than neonatal male genital cutting" but had to backtrack. They are only human - especially on this topic.

[frowniebrown86]

@HyperHowie midwives will NEVER recommend routine infant circumcision. It completely goes against their model of care to even PERFORM the procedure. "Pending"...sorry my friend, evaluation of their stance, over a year ago, has still not resulted in this recommendation you speak of. What really are you so afraid of, that our pristine *sarcasm* aids rates will sky rocket? They are already sky high WITH our nation's high circumcision rate. Routine infant circumcision is wrong, end of story.

[frowniebrown86]

@HyperHowie you're confused. there is NO recommendation for routine infant circumcision...anywhere, by any health organization. There is zero proof that fewer infants/minors get aids because of circumcision. What a terrible thing, to deny a person their right to their whole body, under the assumption that they won't know how to wash or use condoms, abstinence, or mutual monogamy.

[Cozzi0]

My foreskin was removed at the age of 5 due to a "medical reason" to which i do not even know myself, if there is no real medical reason to be circumcised why the fuck did some surgeon mutilate my own penis against my own will?

[endofscene]

@HyperHowie The fact is that you you are circumcised and you had your son/s circumcised because it is part of your culture and you are ignorant. And now you want to believe that it was all for the best, like many in circumcising cultures do. You are trying to justify your state and your decision, just as circumcised females do in other cultures. It's sad and pathetic.

[endofscene]

@HyperHowie Even if the studies you allude to were valid, which I don't believe they are, what do they show? That in some parts of Africa there is a reduction in transmissions rates from women to circumcised men during vaginal intercourse. They show no protection for women and no protection for gay men. And they conclude that all men need to wear condoms for maximum protection. So what's the point?

[endofscene]

@HyperHowie The WHO and CDC are a political organisations that do not deserve your trust. Do they have anything to say about the functions of the foreskin or the ethical implications of RIC? Nope. What do deficient studies performed by circumcised American doctors in Africa have to do with the first world? If circumcision is such a great prophylactic then why does the USA have such high rates of STDs, including HIV?

[endofscene]

@HyperHowie Right: it's a part of HIS penis. So let HIM decide :)

[neechee5150]

sixth subjects who were circumcised routinely recieved more education/aids prevention counseling services than those who were not circumcised. 7th the WHO is a political organizaion not a medical science organizaion, and the WHO is funded by & subservient to the agendas of the Bilderbergs, the CFR, the Trilateral Commision and the Fabian Society. 8th.The WHO chose to ignore contemporary sub saharan studies that found that circumcision did not reduce the spread of AIDS in Africa.

[neechee5150]

Here are a few simple facts that discredit the WHO studies. First, the subjects who were circmcised had less time and opportunity to have sex than the non circumcises subjects due to the need to heal from the proceedure. This is why stopping the studies early is not good science. Second, the practice of dry sex was not controlled for. Third, the use of sex workers was not controlled for. Fourth the practice of anal sex was not controlled for. Fifth condom use was not controlled for.

[neechee5150]

The more recent WHO studies on the spread of AIDS in sub-saharan Africa were performed because the first round of studies that justified circumcision based upon AIDS transmission reduction fell apart under objective peer review and evidence based medicine. So the pro-circumcision crowd constructed new studies which were very poorly designed, were done by people who have a deep need to justify circumcision and were stopped prematurely while the statistics gave them their desired results.

[neechee5150]

of pro-infant circumcising religions are eliminated or held in check, evidence based medicine is hamstrung. Anyone who wants to be circumcised for religious reasons can do so when they are old enought to make that decision for themselves & NO one is loosing freedom of religion in the process. Ironically the person who is denied religious freedom by infant circumcision for religous reasons is the baby boy being circumcised as he is NOT able to choose to particpate in the ritual of circumcision.

[neechee5150]

These doctors and scientists use these poor africans as subjects in their research in ways that PETA would condemn were they using animal subjects for these experiments. These so called doctors and scientists direct their subjest to spread AIDS thus starting a network of misery, suffering and death of innocent africans these doctors have blood on their hands in the process.

Until ignorance, blind tradition, and the imense political power and influence

[neechee5150]

has to be employed. It used to be everything from masterbation (dimininshing sexual pleasure is the longest held/believed justification that spans centuries), various mental illnesses, to the plague of the particular age.

So now the medical community has had to move to a new fear based justification for circumcision due to fears of AIDS transmission. These doctors's whose first mandate is to first do no harm have ben the direct instrument in and cause of AIDS being spread

[neechee5150]

The general public is ignorant of the history of the so called medical justifications for infant circumcision in the US. The so called medical reasons have changed as this wise doctor points out once the professed medical reasons that generation were led to believe in fall apart in the face of logic, evidence based medicine and truth. In order to avoid admitting the US doctors and medical schools have been torturing baby boys for no legitimate medical reason, a new scare/frear mongering