It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Study: Male Circumcision Helps Prevent 2 STDs

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 07:18 AM

Circumcision not only protects against HIV in heterosexual men, but it also helps prevent two other sexually transmitted infections, a large new study found. Circumcised males reduced their risk of infection with HPV, or human papillomavirus, by 35 percent and herpes by 28 percent. However, researchers found circumcision had no effect on the transmission of syphilis.

Landmark studies from three African countries including Uganda previously found circumcision lowered men's chance of catching the AIDS virus by up to 60 percent. The new study stems from the Uganda research and looked at protection against three other STDs. The findings are reported in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine.

"Evidence now strongly suggests that circumcision offers an important prevention opportunity and should be widely available," Drs. Matthew Golden and Judith Wasserheit of the University of Washington wrote in an accompanying editorial.

Worldwide, only about 30 percent of men are circumcised. The figure is higher in the United States, where about 79 percent of men are circumcised, according to surveys by the National Center for Health Statistics.

An international team of researchers who conducted the study said circumcision, the surgical removal of the foreskin from the penis, should be an accepted method to reduce sexually transmitted infections among heterosexuals.

"It must be emphasized that protection was only partial, and it is critical to promote the practice of safe sex," they wrote.

Even though this may provide partial protection, safe sex needs to be hammered home throughout the world.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 08:05 AM
I would guess that castration would also prevent a lot of STD's. Shall we do that as well? What about lobotomies to prevent mental illness? Maybe cut off people's arms to prevent them from beating their wives?

Seriously, does anybody really believe that cutting pieces of your sexual organs off is a good idea? Doesn't it fail the "common sense" check?

[edit on 26-3-2009 by LordBucket]

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 08:19 AM
Personally, I don't understand why so many people are against circumcision these days. I've read many opinions that state it's a form of mutilation. Meh! I was circumcised as a child and I certainly don't consider myself as mutilated, nor have any of my girlfriends. I'm not mentally scared and it does not affect my sex life adversely. IMHO, that's just fear mongering.

Apart from the extra level of protection against STD's and a greater level of hygiene, it could also be suggested that it's more aesthetically pleasing... I mean... I've never seen an uncircumcised dildo and these sex aid companies certain aren't short on research in the markets that are crying out for their products. In short, they don't distribute what doesn't sell.... but I digress...

Besides a higher vulnerability to STD's there are also many other health related risks to having a foreskin. Two of my mates had to have circumcisions in their late teens and early 20's due to 'complications'. They told me that they would have preferred to have had the procedure when they were young an not remember it. Having been sexually active before an after circumcision, they both said it hasn't affected their love lives adversely either!

So where do these myths come from?


posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 08:32 AM
Yeah, "experts" suggest a lot of things.

Here's another...

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 10:01 AM
Who is mostly pushing for this? Isn't it really religious groups?

It's probably not considered mutilation to some people, because they are so used to it, but where I live it's very uncommon, and people think of it as a bit weird.

I've heard a number of arguments for it.

Personal Hygiene. This I consider a red herring really, especially in western nations where nobody goes without soap. 2000 years ago, when people didn't have such access to hygiene products, and didn't understand so well the nature of bacteria and such, I can understand it seeming sensible, but anyone in modern times is going to be washing their penis every day anyway, so I expect the general hygiene improvements are non-existent.

Religion. I don't like this one when it involves forcing it onto those who have no choice, ie babies (although I don't like it either for medical reasons, that is at least based on some science). If an adult decides they want to circumcise for religious reasons, I won't get in their way, but I do think they are idiots, it's got to be the worst reason in my opinion, yet some people do argue it.

Medical. Probably the only slightly compelling argument to me, especially as the data is quite mixed, and possibly on the side of medical benefits. However the medical benefits seem quite slim. In the case of protection against STDs, this can also be gained by the simple act of wearing a condom. Some may argue that in certain nations people don't have that choice, but that leads into a slippery argument on essentially eugenics. Once you adopt a policy/law on this, you're not really far away from 1 child policies or forced sterilizations of undesirables. Actions like that are anti-freedom in my opinion, and my opinion doesn't change when it's some other country in case. Although I may be labelled a filthy commie for suggesting it, I think it would be better to give money for condoms to these nations than to try and pressure them into taking anti-freedom choices such as forced circumcision.

Sexual. I've even seen this argued on both sides, that it makes them more sensitive, which gives a better experience, or that it makes them less sensitive, meaning they can last longer. I really don't know, and have never seen real science on this subject. I think people on both sides are still enjoying sex, so I tend to not even care about this argument.

Overall my opinion on this matter is settled by the idea of personal permission. I totally reject all attempts to force this onto those without a choice such as very young children. If once they are old enough to make a decision they desire a circumcision, I am fine with that.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 10:07 AM
reply to post by LordBucket

haha spot on!

I totally agree.

The easiest way to not get STDs is to stop being promiscuous/ ignorant about protection.

I can see this backfiring by circumcized men thinking they are "immune" and not bothering with protection.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 10:08 AM
It just plain and simply amounts to violence and agression against someone that studies have shown feels an even greater amount of pain at that moment in life. It just amounts to psychological control as well, trauma induced immediately after birth seems to imprint on males especially that the world consists of mostly violent SOB's hell bent on poking and prodding and more or less creating an environment of fear and distrust.
It doesn't surprise me at all when I read of some kid gunning down a classroom or some guy flipping out on police, they were shown this as the way from almost the moment they arrived.

Trauma induced dissociative psychosis, then they are put into social settings in which they fight for position with each other for approval of those that have their fingers on the pain inducement button.

When a bunch of mice are in a cage and electrical shocks are sent over the floor of the cage the mice will gang up on the one mice that appears the weakest of the bunch and thrash it to death.
So I think in summary the sense or actual loss of control can bring about the violent behavior in the male that has no control over the pain being inflicted upon it, even if only a few carry out violence then that represents a mistake to make up excuses for the few, but most become if not violent very agressive and angry in life and we fail to see the imprinting we create by our senseless actions and try to rationalize that it benefits when studies are not in complete agreement on the infection rate being lower at all.

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 10:20 AM

Originally posted by bubbabuddha

It doesn't surprise me at all when I read of some kid gunning down a classroom or some guy flipping out on police, they were shown this as the way from .

Of course! Circumcision is the cause of school shootings; that makes even more sense than video games.

Psychology wise, you could have a point, but i was cut and as a kid I was never afraid or aware that all people were inherently bad.

No, I didn't believe that until I started watching the news.


log in