-
Male circumcision is associated with a reduced risk of penile HPV infection and, in the case of men with a history of multiple sexual partners, a reduced risk of cervical cancer in their current female partners.
The idea is that schmega (yes it's a real technical term) increases the chances of having HPV, certain types of which has been implicated in cervical cancer. Since uncircumcised men may have increased amounts of schmega if they don't properly occassionally retract their foreskin and clean the area, the area tends to be more inflamed and irritated, making infection with HPV more likely.
If a man cleans himself properly, and wears condoms the chances of passing along a potentially lethal virus (ie something that may cause cervical cancer) is decreased.
I'm circumcised, although my son initially wasn't. However he developed a condition where circumcision was the best choice of care.
I think it's a personal choice and won't advocate either way, although the data does suggest some advantages for circumcised men. I also don't think there is any thing particularly "ugly" about a penis that is circumcised or not.
Sunday, November 08, 2009
About male circumcision,
DMG said...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Were you waiting on me long MOTI? You put my quote up so fast, makes a brother think you were fiending for my return.
Enough with the penis talk already.
Doc,
What's your opinion on circumcision and reducing risk of HIV infection? That's the campaign in the pipeline in some African countries, but the evidence does not show there's been a reduction in HIV due to circumcision. It's speculative and there are no blind studies to support the findings of Gray, Bailey et al.
DMG said...
Were you waiting on me long MOTI? You put my quote up so fast, makes a brother think you were fiending for my return.
LOL.
All that talk of dick heads ...
Damn I thought DV and DMG had a moment...
KonWomyn,
Sorry, didn't see this one til now. I'm uncertain if advocationg circumcision rather than condom use is a good idea (perhaps with condom use or other methods). But the data I've read states there is a significant reduction in transmission from male-female, and there is a biologically plausible reason similar to why anal receptive intercourse is high risk behavior for HIV infection having to do with exposing cells that are targets for HIV infection. Here's a pdf with info.
Because of cultural reasons condom use has been a difficult sell. Achieving wide spread abstinence, although desirable to slow down the disease isn't practical, so let's not kid ourselves. Monogamy would be ideal too, but isn't likely to happen...especially when the lure of making money in the city fractures families who traditionally live in a rural environment...and let's not forget long distance truck drivers.
Post a Comment