Post from Reading List:
Cut Out HIV?
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.

From hippies reclaiming the body to immigrant groups who wouldn't even consider it, CNN reports that the circumcision rate in the United States has reached an all-time low of 57 percent. The American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends forgoing circumcision, calling it an unnecessary and painful surgery. Even so, the United States remains the Western nation with by far the least foreskins. In the U.K, for example, fewer than 20 percent of men are circumcised; in Denmark, the number is less than 2 percent.

But don't call off the bris just yet. As I reported for In These Times last month, the World Health Organization is now recommending the procedure, emboldened by studies that found adult circumcisions in Africa decreased men's likelihood of contracting HIV by as much as 60 percent. Following the WHO's lead, New York City is considering promoting adult circumcision as a preventative measure, which worries activists who've been struggling for decades to send the message that using condoms is the only surefire way to protect yourself.

Seems to me that since evidence clearly shows circumcision protects men and their partners from a variety of sexually transmitted infections, we should be promoting the practice, not among grown men who may see the procedure as an alternative to safe sex, but among expectant parents. Get 'em while they're young and you can give them the anatomical benefits of circumcision alongside the lessons about protection and contraception.

- cross-posted at TAPPED 


Reader Comments
  
snip snip
By Zach Marks Jun 21st 2007 at 3:20 pm EDT
Yeah, come on guys. I got mine done and it didn't hurt a lick.

Except I just saw this article with the title "Male circumcision overstated as prevention tool against AIDS." Link
  
don't do them any favors
By deji Jun 29th 2007 at 3:23 am EDT
It's always risky to prescribe a procedure to those who cannot defend themselves and this applies to infants too. Why even study the debatable benefits of circumcision? Would we preform pre-emptive surgery to prevent breast cancer or heart attack? Who would choose to lose all their hair if it could prevent breast cancer? How about a nipple? At what point is it okay? At what point is it okay to decide for someone else? If an article said nipple removal was beneficial in preventing HIV who would undergo the surgery or would you just choose to use a condom? The tradeoff seems easy for me, I'd choose condoms. Maybe you wouldn't but I wouldn't want you to make that decision for me.
  
Campus Progress

Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.

Campus Progress