CDC rec to counsel all males about benefits of circumcision

Published

Wasn't sure the best place to put this, but here's the article:

CDC Considers Counseling Males Of All Ages On Circumcision : Shots - Health News : NPR

What do you think of this? Have you read the African studies and do you think they translate to our population? Do you think it's a good idea from a public health standpoint?

Specializes in Anesthesia.
Does male circumcision affect sexual fu... - PubMed Mobile - NCBI Systematic review of the literature finds no difference in sexual function with male circumcision.
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.
just as female circ have been part of islam for thousands of years, it remains offense to me that anyone would do this, dont expect a free pass on this.

Male and female circumcision are two totally different things that people like yourself like to throw into the male circumcision debate to try to justify your position.

There are proven medical/public health benefits for male circumcision. There are no general medical or public benefits for female circumcision. The opposite appears to be true for female circumcision.

Male circumcision probably has no effect on sexual function or feeling per systematic literature reviews, which again is just the opposite of female circumcision.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in hospice.

Because of course removing thousands of nerve endings has no effect, as does removing about 1/3 of total penile skin and disrupting blood flow.

It's a human rights issue, bottom line. It's not necessary, so stop cutting up babies.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.
Because of course removing thousands of nerve endings has no effect, as does removing about 1/3 of total penile skin and disrupting blood flow.

It's a human rights issue, bottom line. It's not necessary, so stop cutting up babies.

It has been studied and no, there's no evidence it has a negative effect of men. And actually studies that look at self-described loss of sensation (when able to compare after being circumcised as adults) as well as self-described sexual satisfaction actually correlate the loss of some nerve endings with an increased level of satisfaction when a correlation appears present, although for the most part it studies show no difference. Excessive stimulation is actually far more common of a complaint among men, thus the premature ejaculation treatment industry.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Emergency, ICU.
just as female circ have been part of islam for thousands of years, it remains offense to me that anyone would do this, dont expect a free pass on this.

Free pass on what? What are you talking about? Female circumcision is completely different and abhorrent. Male circumcision only shares the name, it is a totally different procedure and I resent it being called criminal or unethical. You don't have to get your boys cut and that's your choice. I have read the research and have attended many a bris -- the kids do just fine. Now and later in life. No mutilation, no PTSD, no freaking big deal.

Look, I am not going to convince you or Red K to change your minds and you have a right to your opinion, just stop insulting people who think differently and yes, who believe in the covenant.

Sent from my iPhone -- blame all errors on spellcheck

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Sorry, Red Kryptonite, I meant morte. Stupid phone. I WILL LEARN HOW TO QUOTE!

Up Vote Up Vote ×
What country do you live in? Because in the United States, the default very much IS for circumcision.

Do you even read? I am not saying the default for the United States is not for circumcision, I am saying those people who omit to decide whether to circumcise are defaulting to not circumcise.

And for what it is worth, there is no default in the United States to circumcise, that is why it is a CHOICE.

But I guess you only misconstrued other people's words to validate your point, which you have done this entire thread.

I think in your ongoing nursing education you need to study up on the principles of debate, legitimate and unbiased research, and learning to give people an unbiased view of THEIR choices in THEIR life because if this is how you expect to treat your patients as nurse, you are doing your patients a disservice in swaying their judgements to match your views on circumcision. A part of nursing is to let patients make an informed decision based on all the data available, NOT to make the decision FOR them because of YOUR beliefs.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.
Because of course removing thousands of nerve endings has no effect, as does removing about 1/3 of total penile skin and disrupting blood flow.

It's a human rights issue, bottom line. It's not necessary, so stop cutting up babies.

1. That is all opinion.

2. It is not a human right issue. What is being discussed here is a public health issue. A proven public health issue.

3. When people stop having sex, males stop needing medically indicated circumcisions, and when it stops being part of millions of people's religious practice then we can seriously consider stopping male circumcision.

The removing of the foreskin has not been shown statistically significant in decreasing feeling or sexual function of men.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I've read through this entire thread and the consensus I see is that some believe parents should not be able to choose whether to circumcise. However, is there any reason why having a infant circumcised hurts the child besides the initial procedure?
Circumcision forever alters the genitals in ways that can not be undone (well, I have heard there are some foreskin stretching devices out there but don't know how well those work). The main difference I can see, besides looks, is that masturbation is far easier if circumcision hasn't been done, as you don't need artificial lubricant.

What about those parents who do not want to breastfeed but instead formula feed. Are those parent unethical too? Do they deserve to have their decision-making abilities taken away because THEY are deciding what their child eats and not letting the child decide for themselves?
Breastfeeding is a whole 'nother topic. A baby does not have the physical nor mental ability to decide what to eat, they can only suck on what is given to them. While breastfeeding is better, formula will still serve its purpose to allow the child to live and grow. (I believe an effort to breastfeed should be made, but, there are many reasons why a mom may not be able to breastfeed.) Eating can not be postponed like circumcision can.
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Pediatrics, High-Risk L&D, Antepartum, L.
Guess I'll add my own thoughts:

Saying circumcision is disruptive to breastfeeding is as valid as saying sunlight is disruptive to breastfeeding. Meaning that anytime anything ever 'disrupts' breastfeeding, it is a source of blame, rather than finding out the REAL source of breastfeeding trouble. This is based on my MANY years as a LLL Leader, having helped many hundreds of women get past breastfeeding issues that were NOT 'breastfeeding issues' at all but 'issues that were blamed as the cause problems with breastfeeding'. So that argument should be considered just as valid as saying small breasts are disruptive to breastfeeding....in other words, not. Also worth mentioning that it's pretty common to see a nursing mother comfort her newborn after circumcision BY breastfeeding....(with it frequently being the MOTHER who needed the comforting when she heard her baby cry!)......and with vigor ;)

As an IBCLC I disagree with this...

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.
Circumcision forever alters the genitals in ways that can not be undone (well, I have heard there are some foreskin stretching devices out there but don't know how well those work). The main difference I can see, besides looks, is that masturbation is far easier if circumcision hasn't been done, as you don't need artificial lubricant.

Breastfeeding is a whole 'nother topic. A baby does not have the physical nor mental ability to decide what to eat, they can only suck on what is given to them. While breastfeeding is better, formula will still serve its purpose to allow the child to live and grow. (I believe an effort to breastfeed should be made, but, there are many reasons why a mom may not be able to breastfeed.) Eating can not be postponed like circumcision can.

Males have no problem masturbating no matter if they are uncircumcised or not, but I happy to hear that you ladies are so worried about man's ability to masturbate effectively and comfortably. It is also a misnomer that circumcised males need lubrication to masturbate or have sex comfortably.

The systematic literature review shows no difference in sexual function between circumcised men and uncircumcised men.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Circumcision forever alters the genitals in ways that can not be undone (well, I have heard there are some foreskin stretching devices out there but don't know how well those work). The main difference I can see, besides looks, is that masturbation is far easier if circumcision hasn't been done, as you don't need artificial lubricant.

While these things may be true, none of it is hurting the child's well-being, as with males not circumcised, they generally do not have to worry their well-being. So what's the issue? Circumcised babies won't be able to masturbate as easy? That a small piece of skin is removed to potentially reduce the risk of diseases/complications later in life?

While I do agree with your answer on what comes after circumcision, I don't believe it is such a "barbaric procedure" to go as far to say "a human rights issue". No, a human rights issue is taking away rights from a person. Parents decide to have children, and they are their legal guardians who have a RIGHT to make decisions for THEIR children. If people don't agree with the decisions that other parents make for their children, then have your own children and raise them the way you want to raise them. Don't parade around an yell "human rights issue" on anything YOU don't agree with.

(BTW Ayvah, this is not directed at you, I feel you provided a reasonable and accurate response, which shows what the REAL issue is, i.e. people want the world to revolve around their beliefs.)

Breastfeeding is a whole 'nother topic. A baby does not have the physical nor mental ability to decide what to eat, they can only suck on what is given to them. While breastfeeding is better, formula will still serve its purpose to allow the child to live and grow. (I believe an effort to breastfeed should be made, but, there are many reasons why a mom may not be able to breastfeed.) Eating can not be postponed like circumcision can.

And while I do agree with you on feeding a child as a basic need and that breastfeeding is better, the mothers who are ABLE to breastfeed but choose not to have that right to decide for themselves and their child. However, I used this as an example because like you said, breastfeeding is better, but some people still choose to formula feed even if they can breastfeed safety.

What I am getting at is that if both options do not harm the child's well-being, why is there an issue of what parents decide to choose for their children?

Oh I forgot, the child will be able to think for themselves when they grow up and will be disappointed their parents decided to remove their foreskin. And why are they disappointed they don't have a foreskin? Because of looks? Because they can't masturbate easier? Because they don't have to clean their member as much? Because they possibly have less diseases? Because when they get older, they may have severe problem with their foreskin that they are just dying to acquire?

I have no problem with parents deciding to not circumcise. I'm just saying it is a choice and should stay that way.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion