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 hospice.

You all realize that there is no one procedure that defines "female circumcision" right? There are several types and type 1A is directly anatomically equivalent to US practice on boys.

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/overview/en/

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in hospice.
I do not see where I advocated removing baby breast buds or any other "bulldust" as you are suggesting. Please use someone else's words for posting your hyperbolic statements.

I never accused you of any such thing, and was confirming that no one was advocating that, or would.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Oncology/Haemetology/HIV.

Then perhaps you should not attach your personal hyperbole to an unrelated quote by me.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.
You all realize that there is no one procedure that defines "female circumcision" right? There are several types and type 1A is directly anatomically equivalent to US practice on boys.

WHO | Classification of female genital mutilation

There is no equivalent. There is no comparison. It doesn't matter how minor the female "circumcision" is it will never be comparable thing to male circumcision.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Pediatrics, High-Risk L&D, Antepartum, L.
You can look them up too. I think many of the studies have biases. I do know that the CDC, ACOG, WHO, and AAP all agree that there is enough compelling evidence to state that routine male circumcision health benefits outweigh the risks.

"Circumcision and non-ulcerative STI

In a prospective multicenter USA study, there was evidence

for an increased incidence of gonorrheal infection in uncircumcised

men (odds ratio 1.5), but no difference with

respect to chlamydial infection.68 In a South African trial,

Chlamydia trachomatis infections decreased among circumcised

men with a borderline statistical significance.69 A

randomized trial, which investigated the prevalence of Neisseria

gonorrhoeae amongst South African men, showed that

circumcised and uncircumcised men showed similar prevalence

rates,70 which was supported by a Kenyan randomized

trial.71 Furthermore, no link between circumcision and

gonococcal or chlamydial urethritis was detected in a

meta-analysis."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23573952

I had to pull the article up with my school account so you won't be able to see what I quoted unless you can get the full article.

Actually with how the AAP changes their mind on this...one would argue their opinion is opinion du jour.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.
Actually with how the AAP changes their mind on this...one would argue their opinion is opinion du jour.

Actually, you would say that is how EBP works. You change the practice to reflect current literature/research.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in hospice.
There is no equivalent. There is no comparison. It doesn't matter how minor the female "circumcision" is it will never be comparable thing to male circumcision.

Did you even read the link? Type 1A removes the prepuce only. That's what male circumcision is. The different sex organs form from the same fetal tissues during prenatal development! The male and female glans and prepuce literally begin as the same thing before differentiation in the womb. Not only are they comparable, they're the same tissues, erectile, erogeous nerves, and protective covering, just differently sized and shaped.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Pediatrics, High-Risk L&D, Antepartum, L.
Actually, you would say that is how EBP works. You change the practice to reflect current literature/research.

Or they change their minds when they worry they upset people. The research didn't change when they made their last opinion change.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.
Or they change their minds when they worry they upset people. The research didn't change when they made their last opinion change.

So the CDC is also just basing their tentative decision on out dated information too.? Is that what you are trying to imply?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.
Did you even read the link? Type 1A removes the prepuce only. That's what male circumcision is. The different sex organs form from the same fetal tissues during prenatal development! The male and female glans and prepuce literally begin as the same thing before differentiation in the womb. Not only are they comparable, they're the same tissues, erectile, erogeous nerves, and protective covering, just differently sized and shaped.

There is no comparison. There is absolutely no medical or public health benefit from female genital mutilation.

[h=1]"Female genital mutilation[/h]Fact sheet N°241

Updated February 2014

[h=3]Key facts[/h]

  • Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
  • The procedure has no health benefits for girls and women.
  • Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later cysts, infections, infertility as well as complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths.
  • More than 125 million girls and women alive today have been cut in the 29 countries in Africa and Middle East where FGM is concentrated (1).
  • FGM is mostly carried out on young girls sometime between infancy and age 15.
  • FGM is a violation of the human rights of girls and women.

Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.

The practice is mostly carried out by traditional circumcisers, who often play other central roles in communities, such as attending childbirths. However, more than 18% of all FGM is performed by health care providers, and the trend towards medicalization is increasing.

FGM is recognized internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women. It reflects deep-rooted inequality between the sexes, and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. It is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of the rights of children. The practice also violates a person's rights to health, security and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to life when the procedure results in death." WHO | Female genital mutilation

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Does anyone really think most parents circ'd their boys due to fear of penile cancer or infections?

At least acknowledge that nearly everyone you know is influenced and makes the decision based on aesthetics and/or religion, but heavily weighted on aesthetics. And then maybe refers to a scientific article in defense, if they even care.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Anesthesia.

The whole point of the thread is the CDC justified in offering HCPs educational material on the risks and benefits of male circumcision. We all know there is a large cultural and religious component to being circumcised, but that still doesn't change the fact there are still medical and public health benefits from male circumcision or that parents should be offered unbiased information on male circumcision.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion