reconciliation
March 26, 2009 11:47 AM Subscribe
It's official: Circumcision should be routinely considered as a way to reduce the risk of sexually transmitted infections.
This post was deleted for the following reason: There's a big difference between "it's official" and "the results of a contested study by a couple of people suggests that", and hanging a post about circumcision on the latter seems like not a great idea. -- cortex
They spoke out after research found circumcision significantly cut the risk...
Ha! Get it? Cut the risk?
posted by gurple at 11:51 AM on March 26, 2009
Ha! Get it? Cut the risk?
posted by gurple at 11:51 AM on March 26, 2009
FTA: "Uh, no, that article title is misleading. Forget we said that."
posted by thanotopsis at 11:51 AM on March 26, 2009
posted by thanotopsis at 11:51 AM on March 26, 2009
If we can work this into a peace plan for the I/P conflict, we've got the Mother of All Threads. How about this: Jews give up the West Bank in exchange for forced circumcision of all Palestinian males?
posted by fatbird at 11:52 AM on March 26, 2009
posted by fatbird at 11:52 AM on March 26, 2009
Can you circumcise a declawed, overweight, Republican cat? I don't want him getting feline HIV and this seems to be the only option.
posted by stavrogin at 11:52 AM on March 26, 2009
posted by stavrogin at 11:52 AM on March 26, 2009
My damp penis and I do not appreciate this.
posted by greekphilosophy at 11:54 AM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by greekphilosophy at 11:54 AM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
Dr O'Mahony also said pushing circumcision as a solution sent the wrong message.
"It suggests that it is women who infect innocent men - let's protect the innocent men.
"And it allows men who don't want to change their irresponsible behaviour to continue to sleep around and not even use a condom."
In other news, all men are rapists, and cholesterol-lowering drugs encourage irresponsible consumption of beef.
posted by Krrrlson at 11:54 AM on March 26, 2009
"It suggests that it is women who infect innocent men - let's protect the innocent men.
"And it allows men who don't want to change their irresponsible behaviour to continue to sleep around and not even use a condom."
In other news, all men are rapists, and cholesterol-lowering drugs encourage irresponsible consumption of beef.
posted by Krrrlson at 11:54 AM on March 26, 2009
Wait, so if your penis is damp you're more likely to get infected?
So, what, are circumcised guys less likely to engage in foreplay?
posted by cimbrog at 11:55 AM on March 26, 2009
So, what, are circumcised guys less likely to engage in foreplay?
posted by cimbrog at 11:55 AM on March 26, 2009
Circumcision reduces risk by 25%. Condoms reduce risk by 99.9%.
And the answer is to encourage circumcision?
posted by rocket88 at 11:57 AM on March 26, 2009
And the answer is to encourage circumcision?
posted by rocket88 at 11:57 AM on March 26, 2009
I have not found circumcizing my condom to be of any use.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:58 AM on March 26, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:58 AM on March 26, 2009 [2 favorites]
This thread will surely discuss the issue at hand and not devolve into a wankiary of injokes and popcorn-reachers.
posted by Liver at 11:58 AM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Liver at 11:58 AM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
Circumcision may reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, but it creates a burning sensation here on Metafilter.
posted by adamrice at 11:58 AM on March 26, 2009
posted by adamrice at 11:58 AM on March 26, 2009
Not everyone is convinced:
Dr Colm O'Mahony, a sexual health expert from the Countess of Chester Foundation Trust Hospital in Chester, said the US had an "obsession" with circumcision being the answer to controlling sexually transmitted infections.posted by Kadin2048 at 11:59 AM on March 26, 2009
He said: "Sure, a dry skinned penis is a bit less likely to contract HIV, herpes and possibly genital warts but it will get infected eventually."
Dr O'Mahony also said pushing circumcision as a solution sent the wrong message.
Yeah, the thinking here seems muddled.
posted by chunking express at 12:00 PM on March 26, 2009
posted by chunking express at 12:00 PM on March 26, 2009
If I ever have a kid, I'm going to insist that the doctor removes his or her feet to minimize the risk of running with scissors.
posted by bunnytricks at 12:01 PM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by bunnytricks at 12:01 PM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
So by "it's official," you mean, two scientists at one university make the argument, while numerous other equally expert people take the opposite position?
"You keep using that word..." etc etc.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 12:02 PM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
"You keep using that word..." etc etc.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 12:02 PM on March 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
In other news, all men are rapists, and cholesterol-lowering drugs encourage irresponsible consumption of beef.
You haven't see the new bachelor party med kit? Rohypnol, Plavix, Zantac, Viagra.
posted by oneironaut at 12:04 PM on March 26, 2009
You haven't see the new bachelor party med kit? Rohypnol, Plavix, Zantac, Viagra.
posted by oneironaut at 12:04 PM on March 26, 2009
(I was trying to bring this thread to a boil moil.)
posted by ZenMasterThis at 12:08 PM on March 26, 2009
posted by ZenMasterThis at 12:08 PM on March 26, 2009
A couple of researchers writing a suggestion in a journal turns out to not be the same thing as "it's official."
There isn't much if any question that circumcision lowers transmittal rates of many STDs all other things being equal. Oh, "all other things being equal," truly you are the rhetorical gift that just keeps on giving. Such as, "provided giving the people the impression that they have been surgically immunized against the possibility of disease doesn't lead to more reckless sexual behavior and a net detriment in the effort to halt the spread of STDs."
And so on.
The tags seem a bit deficient, don't they, plexi? I mean, why in the world would you not use "circumcision" or "aids" or "hiv" as tags? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that doing so might reveal that the topic is very old news that has been discussed to death.
posted by nanojath at 12:09 PM on March 26, 2009
There isn't much if any question that circumcision lowers transmittal rates of many STDs all other things being equal. Oh, "all other things being equal," truly you are the rhetorical gift that just keeps on giving. Such as, "provided giving the people the impression that they have been surgically immunized against the possibility of disease doesn't lead to more reckless sexual behavior and a net detriment in the effort to halt the spread of STDs."
And so on.
The tags seem a bit deficient, don't they, plexi? I mean, why in the world would you not use "circumcision" or "aids" or "hiv" as tags? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that doing so might reveal that the topic is very old news that has been discussed to death.
posted by nanojath at 12:09 PM on March 26, 2009
Also, it's pretty shocking that the international calamari industry would stoop so low as to fund so-called "objective" research like this just because supply is running low.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 12:09 PM on March 26, 2009
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 12:09 PM on March 26, 2009
Abstract:
Background Male circumcision significantly reduced the incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among men in three clinical trials. We assessed the efficacy of male circumcision for the prevention of herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) and human papillomavirus (HPV) infections and syphilis in HIV-negative adolescent boys and men.posted by pracowity at 12:10 PM on March 26, 2009
Methods We enrolled 5534 HIV-negative, uncircumcised male subjects between the ages of 15 and 49 years in two trials of male circumcision for the prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. Of these subjects, 3393 (61.3%) were HSV-2–seronegative at enrollment. Of the seronegative subjects, 1684 had been randomly assigned to undergo immediate circumcision (intervention group) and 1709 to undergo circumcision after 24 months (control group). At baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months, we tested subjects for HSV-2 and HIV infection and syphilis, along with performing physical examinations and conducting interviews. In addition, we evaluated a subgroup of subjects for HPV infection at baseline and at 24 months.
Results At 24 months, the cumulative probability of HSV-2 seroconversion was 7.8% in the intervention group and 10.3% in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio in the intervention group, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.92; P=0.008). The prevalence of high-risk HPV genotypes was 18.0% in the intervention group and 27.9% in the control group (adjusted risk ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.90; P=0.009). However, no significant difference between the two study groups was observed in the incidence of syphilis (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.65; P=0.44).
Conclusions In addition to decreasing the incidence of HIV infection, male circumcision significantly reduced the incidence of HSV-2 infection and the prevalence of HPV infection, findings that underscore the potential public health benefits of the procedure.
Research has suggested that a man with a damp penis has a greater risk of being infected by HIV.
It's not the heat, it's the humidity.
posted by Kabanos at 12:12 PM on March 26, 2009
It's not the heat, it's the humidity.
posted by Kabanos at 12:12 PM on March 26, 2009
« Older A dot in the sky, a rock in the hand | R.I.P. "England Dan" Seals Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by infinitywaltz at 11:50 AM on March 26, 2009