Circumcision Linked to Autism in New Danish Study

Results of a study published this month in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine point to a possible correlation between the circumcision of boys under the age of 5 and an increased risk of developing autism spectrum disorder. Here's an excerpt from the abstract, the full paper is available here:

Participants A total of 342,877 boys born between 1994 and 2003 and followed in the age span 0–9 years between 1994 and 2013.

Main outcome measures Information about cohort members’ ritual circumcisions, confounders and ASD outcomes, as well as two supplementary outcomes, hyperkinetic disorder and asthma, was obtained from national registers. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) associated with foreskin status were obtained using Cox proportional hazards regression analyses.

Results With a total of 4986 ASD cases, our study showed that regardless of cultural background circumcised boys were more likely than intact boys to develop ASD before age 10 years (HR = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.11–1.93). Risk was particularly high for infantile autism before age five years (HR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.36–3.13). Circumcised boys in non-Muslim families were also more likely to develop hyperkinetic disorder (HR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.11–2.96). Associations with asthma were consistently inconspicuous (HR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.84–1.10).

The upshot is this:

Using data from the Danish Civil Registration System, they examined the occurrence of ASD in boys who had undergone ritual circumcision. I'm not familiar with the prevalence of circumcision in Denmark but it sounds like by "ritual circumcision" they are essentially referring to any circumcision that is not done to treat a medical condition, i.e. just about any circumcision.

Their hypothesis is that by a mechanism which is not identified, the pain experienced by infants during and immediately following the procedure leads to an increased risk of ASD. Furthermore, that the younger the child is when the circumcision is performed, the higher the risk. Here's the breakdown of the numbers they used to calculate a 46% increased risk for boys who underwent circumcision in the 0-9 age group:

With 57 ASD cases in ritually circumcised boys and 4929 ASD cases in intact boys, the overall ASD risk in the age interval 0–9 years was 46% increased in ritually circumcised boys (HR = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.11–1.93). This was due to noticeably increased ASD risk in the first 0–4 years of life (HR = 1.80; 95% CI: 1.25–2.60), but not in the 5–9 years age interval (HR = 1.15; 95% CI: 0.75–1.77). For boys circumcised before their second birthday, overall ASD risk during the first 0–9 years of life was 41% elevated (HR = 1.41; 95% CI: 1.05–1.90). The HR was higher, though not significantly so, for boys circumcised at age 24 months or older (HR = 1.96; 95% CI: 0.93–4.14), an estimate based on only seven cases of ASD in that group (Table 2).

Interesting results that warrant further studies in my opinion but I'm not entirely sold.

a reply to: theantediluvian


I'd be rendered speechless too if I was 4 or 5 and realized someone was gonna slice my winkie. Luckily I was only a day old.

Well, there you go, we always say men think with two heads....

No but seriously, I can't fathom how one could effect the other...? Do they have any hypothesis on how that could be?

The reference to ritual is because in Europe, it is only done for religious reasons, by jewish and muslims.
They don't do it systematically over here, like in the US.
Do they do it to everyone in England too?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Both my daughter and myself (female, just in case anyone is confused) are on the autistic spectrum. Curiously, neither one of us has had a circumcision. Weird.

Is this like the American Science Journal where almost anyone can write an opinion?

The ASJ has had some doozies.

Gonna need to research the author to find out his agenda. Everyone seems to have one.

a reply to: theantediluvian

This story/report, whatever, is proof positive of something I've been thinking for quite some time.

There's something terribly wrong in the world of science these days. And it isn't limited to this type incident. The problem also spills over to areas of Archeological forensics and drug development studies. It's just plain weird.

a reply to: theantediluvian

This sounds stupid. Autism rates are rising but circumcisions are falling.

In this article you see the manipulated in action, attempting to prevent thought by observing without understanding.

Autism seems to be labeling thought, much free time and disability to cope with the manipulated as a disease.
I barely escaped the brain numbing medication and attempts were made to make me "normal".

Indeed, your circumstances, including body shape and race affect whether you become a thinker, though, this articles conclusion seems too fishy.

We need more autism!

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Results of a study published this month in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine point to a possible correlation between the circumcision of boys under the age of 5 and an increased risk of developing autism spectrum disorder. Here's an excerpt from the abstract, the full paper is available here:

Participants A total of 342,877 boys born between 1994 and 2003 and followed in the age span 0–9 years between 1994 and 2013.

Main outcome measures Information about cohort members’ ritual circumcisions, confounders and ASD outcomes, as well as two supplementary outcomes, hyperkinetic disorder and asthma, was obtained from national registers. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) associated with foreskin status were obtained using Cox proportional hazards regression analyses.

Results With a total of 4986 ASD cases, our study showed that regardless of cultural background circumcised boys were more likely than intact boys to develop ASD before age 10 years (HR = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.11–1.93). Risk was particularly high for infantile autism before age five years (HR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.36–3.13). Circumcised boys in non-Muslim families were also more likely to develop hyperkinetic disorder (HR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.11–2.96). Associations with asthma were consistently inconspicuous (HR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.84–1.10).

The upshot is this:

Using data from the Danish Civil Registration System, they examined the occurrence of ASD in boys who had undergone ritual circumcision. I'm not familiar with the prevalence of circumcision in Denmark but it sounds like by "ritual circumcision" they are essentially referring to any circumcision that is not done to treat a medical condition, i.e. just about any circumcision.

Their hypothesis is that by a mechanism which is not identified, the pain experienced by infants during and immediately following the procedure leads to an increased risk of ASD. Furthermore, that the younger the child is when the circumcision is performed, the higher the risk. Here's the breakdown of the numbers they used to calculate a 46% increased risk for boys who underwent circumcision in the 0-9 age group:

With 57 ASD cases in ritually circumcised boys and 4929 ASD cases in intact boys, the overall ASD risk in the age interval 0–9 years was 46% increased in ritually circumcised boys (HR = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.11–1.93). This was due to noticeably increased ASD risk in the first 0–4 years of life (HR = 1.80; 95% CI: 1.25–2.60), but not in the 5–9 years age interval (HR = 1.15; 95% CI: 0.75–1.77). For boys circumcised before their second birthday, overall ASD risk during the first 0–9 years of life was 41% elevated (HR = 1.41; 95% CI: 1.05–1.90). The HR was higher, though not significantly so, for boys circumcised at age 24 months or older (HR = 1.96; 95% CI: 0.93–4.14), an estimate based on only seven cases of ASD in that group (Table 2).

Interesting results that warrant further studies in my opinion but I'm not entirely sold.

It seems more correlation than causation.

If they are correct about what they believe the cause might be (the pain) then that would suggest that an infant within that age group should develop autism if they are injured in a way that they feel as much pain as they would have being circumcised.

However, since there are more robust studies suggesting (and in some cases demonstrating) that autism is present from or prior to birth, this study is quite pointless in some ways.


Most importantly this study doesn't account for the 20% (or more, probably 50%) of autistic children who aren't actually boys.....

Hmmm, could this be an example of how correlation does not equal causation? For some reason modern science seems bound and determined to forget that lately.

originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
a reply to: theantediluvian

This sounds stupid. Autism rates are rising but circumcisions are falling.

It's very debatable as to whether autism rates are rising or whether it's just that diagnoses are increasing.

Autism Prevalence

originally posted by: ketsuko
Hmmm, could this be an example of how correlation does not equal causation? For some reason modern science seems bound and determined to forget that lately.

Seeing as their conclusion is that this requires more study...I doubt that this is the case, in this instance.

From the study:

Conclusions We confirmed our hypothesis that boys who undergo ritual circumcision may run a greater risk of developing ASD. This finding, and the unexpected observation of an increased risk of hyperactivity disorder among circumcised boys in non-Muslim families, need attention, particularly because data limitations most likely rendered our HR estimates conservative. Considering the widespread practice of non-therapeutic circumcision in infancy and childhood around the world, confirmatory studies should be given priority.

They have found correlation and are requesting more studies to dis/prove causation.

I have been reading the theory that infant exposure to paracetemol may be linked to autism and this may go some way to explain why we see this correlation (paracetamol may be given as pain relief during circumcision).

This just reminds me of the guy who connected vaccinations to Autism.

Kind of a --- find what you're looking for by circumstance --- but not real fact.

Another well known Autism researcher claims the body goes through a natural chemical change about every 3 to 5 years (not just at puberty). Which is why some people associate vaccinations with the age. There is a type of Autism that happens around age 3 to 5. The child seems perfectly normal, then starts to show symptoms and might even become severely Autistic.

So, I'm not buying this.

How about we just stop mutilating babies?... Why do we need a reason to stop doing that? It is a disgusting practice.

First it was a draconian religious ritual and now experts loom for any reason they can just to keep it going.

Lets say it was NEVER a religious practice, hypothetically. Do these experts think they could convince parents who have never heard of such a thing, that it is a "healthy" decision to make that their children will have to live with the rest of their lives.

I want to see a new study. Alpha males who are circumcised compared to those who are not. I have a notion...

a reply to: MALBOSIA

I agree that it is genital mutilation and we should stop doing it. Big ol' row with my hubby over it actually if we have another one and it's a boy. I say no circumcision and he says yes. But...

I think that defining an "alpha male" would be problematic and... What's the point of that anyway...?

originally posted by: redhorse
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I agree that it is genital mutilation and we should stop doing it. Big ol' row with my hubby over it actually if we have another one and it's a boy. I say no circumcision and he says yes. But...

I think that defining an "alpha male" would be problematic and... What's the point of that anyway...?

The point is missing a piece of your penis has to have some kind of psychological effect and since we are on a conspiracy site, I figure why not put forth the notion that circumcision might reduce the chance of insurrection by males.

This wouldn't surprise me one bit if it were true. Babies who are circumcised suffer huge trauma when the doctor cuts their foreskin off. I would think that a certain percentage of those babies would end up suffering in the long run through impaired social skills or other effects like anger problems as a result of that trauma.

I always thought they did circumcision so we wouldn't be so nuts?

a reply to: ketsuko

Nothing wrong with showing correlation in science. It's the springboard for further, more rigorous research to find a causal link (if any). This study does just that: offers a starting point for further research. It could well turn out that there's absolutely nothing to it. And that's fine. It's how science works.