CDC rec to counsel all males about benefits of circumcision

klone, MSN, RN · Dec 7, 2014

It's also worth noting that in Europe, where RIC is not practiced and most men are intact, the HIV rate 0.2%, compared to 0.6% in the US. I really think it simply comes down to it being such a strong culturally accepted practice that many health organizations use the data to support their previously held cultural practice. This hullaballoo just isn't taking place in Europe, where RIC is not a strongly culturally ingrained practice.

Worldwide HIV & AIDS Statistics | AVERT

allnurses Guide · Dec 7, 2014

Actually ACOG does NOT recommend routine circumcision. Their current policy statement specifically states:
Surgery to Reduce the Risk of Breast Cancer Fact Sheet - National Cancer Institute
You cannot get cancer of a body part that isn't there. Ergo, removal of the clitoral hood prevents clitoral hood cancer later in life. Just like removal of the foreskin prevents foreskin cancer in males. And routine removal of infant girls' breast buds will prevent breast cancer, something that is a MUCH more common and serious health concern.

That is assuming that the cancer only originated in that part of the body, and that is removed prior to any cancer cells forming. That also presumes that whatever the tissue that the cancer originated in was completely removed, which is often very difficult to impossible to do. Penile cancer rates are lower in circumcised males, but they still occur in circumcised males.

Surgery to Reduce the Risk of Breast Cancer Fact Sheet - National Cancer Institute Cancer Surgery - Metastasis, Tumor - Life Extension Health Concern

allnurses Guide · Dec 7, 2014

I really didn't mean that no one researched the health aspects, I was more referring to people like your spouse who didn't have an opinion and the common parents who are personally grossed out by foreskin. Growing up and even up to more recently I have known many non healthcare types who still find it gross. Women who would be repulsed, and men fearful of that. They're either not making the decision based on health considerations or they are so relieved to have a dr tell them the positives of circumcision so they can stick with their perspective of aesthetics. We have all known them, haven't we?

That is called anecdotal evidence.

allnurses Guide · Dec 7, 2014

It's also worth noting that in Europe, where RIC is not practiced and most men are intact, the HIV rate 0.2%, compared to 0.6% in the US. I really think it simply comes down to it being such a strong culturally accepted practice that many health organizations use the data to support their previously held cultural practice. This hullaballoo just isn't taking place in Europe, where RIC is not a strongly culturally ingrained practice.
Worldwide HIV & AIDS Statistics | AVERT

http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(14)00036-6/fulltext

And your response to the cost benefit ratio that was directly correlated to Europe in this systematic literature review. Is it all just made up to for cultural reasons? HIV is only one benefit from male circumcision.

klone, MSN, RN · Dec 7, 2014

That is assuming that the cancer only originated in that part of the body, and that is removed prior to any cancer cells forming. That also presumes that whatever the tissue that the cancer originated in was completely removed, which is often very difficult to impossible to do. Penile cancer rates are lower in circumcised males, but they still occur in circumcised males.

And clitoral hood cancer rates are lower in females that have had their clitoral hood removed, but I'm sure it doesn't prevent ALL clitoral hood cancers. If you remove the clitoral hood when the girl is a newborn, there won't be any cancer cells there yet. Same with removal of the breast bud.

klone, MSN, RN · Dec 7, 2014

http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(14)00036-6/fulltext
And your response to the cost benefit ratio that was directly correlated to Europe in this systematic literature review. Is it all just made up to for cultural reasons? HIV is only one benefit from male circumcision.

Nevertheless, European health organizations are NOT calling for RIC of all newborn boys. Because it's not part of their cultural practice, and they realize that most risks of the deadly foreskin can be mitigated through OTHER means, such as simple hygiene and STI education.

klone, MSN, RN · Dec 7, 2014

And with that, I'm out. I have a busy day planned of cleaning my young son's foreskin, since it's such an arduous and time consuming task.

allnurses Guide · Dec 7, 2014

And clitoral hood cancer rates are lower in females that have had their clitoral hood removed, but I'm sure it doesn't prevent ALL clitoral hood cancers. If you remove the clitoral hood when the girl is a newborn, there won't be any cancer cells there yet. Same with removal of the breast bud.

There are no documented health benefits to FGM, if you have some present them. That still does not change the fact that there is no real comparison between male circumcision and FGM.

allnurses Guide · Dec 7, 2014

Nevertheless, European health organizations are NOT calling for RIC of all newborn boys. Because it's not part of their cultural practice, and they realize that most risks of the deadly foreskin can be mitigated through OTHER means, such as simple hygiene and STI education.

Now you cannot dispute the public health benefits, so your response is that Europe doesn't recommend RIC.

Then in the U.S.A. the CDC shouldn't provide resources to educate HCPs on the risks and benefits of male circumcision, because European nations do not endorse RIC.? How does that make sense?

There is obvious public health benefits to every country with RIC, if simple hygiene and STI worked then these studies would be obsolete. It has been proven over and over again that education alone will not mitigate all high-risk behaviors. Education can help reduce certain high-risk behaviors, but it does not eliminate it. We educate cigarette smokers all the time, but yet they still smoke. Likewise, there is only so far that education will go with curbing the sex drives/high risk sexual activities in people.

Red Kryptonite · Dec 7, 2014

And with that, I'm out. I have a busy day planned of cleaning my young son's foreskin, since it's such an arduous and time consuming task.

ROFLMAO. klone, you've been awesome in this thread, and I thank you. :)

Red Kryptonite · Dec 7, 2014

Is it all just made up to for cultural reasons?

Yep, pretty much.

I think we can probably let the lifeless equine rest now.

allnurses Guide · Dec 7, 2014

And with that, I'm out. I have a busy day planned of cleaning my young son's foreskin, since it's such an arduous and time consuming task.

Good for you, and he still only has about 1% chance of needing medical intervention for phimosis not to mention the increased risk of STIs, the risk of spreading cervical cancer, slight increase chance of penile cancer, the increased risk of getting and transmitting HIV etc.

I am sure that he will follow all educational instructions when he becomes a teenager and will never ever engage in any high-risk activities, and his hygiene will always be meticulous....