• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Circumcision

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
WelshBloke said:
Weird, I work in a general hospital in the UK and I've never (in 15 years or so) seen any infants/young children with those problems due to not being circumcised. I can ask around if you'd like.
Click to expand...

Where do you work in the hospital? Unless you're in the ED/Peds, I wouldn't be surprised. Not sure what your population is like either, there are quite a few poor/dumb people who make poor/dumb parents in Southern Florida.
 
TheVrolok said:
Where do you work in the hospital? Unless you're in the ED/Peds, I wouldn't be surprised. Not sure what your population is like either, there are quite a few poor/dumb people who make poor/dumb parents in Southern Florida.
Click to expand...


I work in A&E a fair bit and its a big general hospital serving both rural and city locations.

I don't want to get into the anatomy of the paediatric penis but there's a few reasons why what you say shouldn't be a problem.
 
MotionMan said:
Considering the health conditions that existed in the world as a whole, and in the Middle East in particular, when the Jewish tradition of circumcision began, and the fact that one who is not circumcised should go to a little extra effort in the cleaning department, I would beg to differ with your assertion.

But not enough to actually argue about it.

MotionMan
Click to expand...

In principle, I would agree with you, but citing those very same "hygienic" conditions of the period, the procedure probably did more harm than good due to infection and such. It probably raised mortality rates a good few percent on its own.
 
I'm working on a Dartz Prombron retrofit for my station wagon. If folks stop this practice I'll never get enough material to finish.
 
WHAMPOM said:
It was not originally promoted for hygenic reasons but to discourage masturbation. 1920's social control.
Click to expand...
There is no evidence it was promoted to any substantial degree by mainstream conventional medical practice or recommendation. In fact, it was a sufficiently controversial recommendation among mainstream conventional medicine. Even the era's advocates for circumcision as a treatment for EXCESSIVE masturbation (not as prophylaxis to prevent masturbation) noted the practice was done primarily for hygiene and health reasons. And circumcision in Western societies predates 1920 by...umm...a few hundred years.
 
Last edited:
A physical symbol that identified and helped hold together a disenfranchised ethnic population that for most of its' history was dispersed in other countries under foreign ruler? Yeah, what possible practical use could that ever have served in maintaining an ethnic identity?
 
ussfletcher said:
Like mentioned earlier, it greatly reduces the risk of contracting HIV.
Click to expand...

In what situation? In a country such as the USA, the numbers needed to treat to prevent one HIV infection would be extremely high, which is an issue when you consider the complications from the anaestestic or haemorrhage. In Africa in may prove effective, but once again the rate of complications would need to be considered. Safe sex through the use of condoms is still the gold standard of preventing HIV infections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top