Circumcision?

by jstalin 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • kid-A
    kid-A

    Am J Epidemiol. 2005 Nov 1;162(9):907-16. Epub 2005 Sep 21.

    Chlamydia trachomatis Infection in Female Partners of Circumcised and Uncircumcised Adult Men. Castellsague X , Peeling RW , Franceschi S , de Sanjose S , Smith JS , Albero G , Diaz M , Herrero R , Munoz N , Bosch FX .

    Cancer Epidemiology and Registration Unit, Institut d'Investigacio Biomedica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL), Institut Catala d'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.

    Male circumcision has been shown to reduce the risk of acquiring and transmitting a number of venereal infections. However, little is known about the association between male circumcision and the risk of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in the female partner. The authors pooled data on 305 adult couples enrolled as controls in one of five case-control studies of invasive cervical cancer conducted in Thailand, the Philippines, Brazil, Colombia, and Spain between 1985 and 1997. Women provided blood samples for C. trachomatis and Chlamydia pneumoniae antibody detection; a type-specific microfluorescence assay was used. Multivariate odds ratios were computed for the association between male circumcision status and chlamydial seropositivity in women. Compared with women with uncircumcised partners, those with circumcised partners had a 5.6-fold reduced risk of testing seropositive for C. trachomatis (82% reduction; odds ratio = 0.18, 95% confidence interval: 0.05, 0.58). The inverse association was also observed after restricting the analysis to monogamous women and their only male partners (odds ratio = 0.21, 95% confidence interval: 0.06, 0.72). In contrast, seropositivity to C. pneumoniae, a non-sexually-transmitted infection, was not significantly related to circumcision status of the male partner. These findings suggest that male circumcision could reduce the risk of C. trachomatis infection in female sexual partners

    Int J Cancer. 2005 Sep 10;116(4):606-16

    Penile cancer: importance of circumcision, human papillomavirus and smoking in in situ and invasive disease. Daling JR , Madeleine MM , Johnson LG , Schwartz SM , Shera KA , Wurscher MA , Carter JJ , Porter PL , Galloway DA , McDougall JK , Krieger JN .

    Program in Epidemiology, Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA. [email protected]

    Few population-based case-control studies have assessed etiologic factors for penile cancer. Past infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) is a known risk factor for penile cancer; however, few previous studies have related the HPV DNA status of the tumor to potential demographic and behavioral risk factors for the disease or evaluated whether in situ and invasive penile cancer share risk factors. Little information is available on the role and timing of circumcision in the etiology of penile cancer. We conducted a population-based case-control study in western Washington state that included 137 men diagnosed with in situ (n = 75) or invasive (n = 62) penile cancer between January 1, 1979, and December 31, 1998, and 671 control men identified through random digit dialing. Cases and controls were interviewed in person and provided peripheral blood samples. Case and control blood samples were tested for antibodies to HPV16 and HSV-2, and tumor specimens from cases were tested for HPV DNA. Men not circumcised during childhood were at increased risk of invasive (OR = 2.3, 95% CI 1.3-4.1) but not in situ (OR = 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-1.8) penile cancer. Approximately 35% of men with penile cancer who had not been circumcised in childhood reported a history of phimosis compared to 7.6% of controls (OR = 7.4, 95% CI 3.7-15.0). Penile conditions such as tear, rash and injury were associated with increased risk of disease. Among men not circumcised in childhood, phimosis was strongly associated with development of invasive penile cancer (OR = 11.4, 95% CI 5.0-25.9). When we restricted our analysis to men who did not have phimosis, the risk of invasive penile cancer associated with not having been circumcised in childhood was not elevated (OR = 0.5, 95% CI 0.1-2.5). Cigarette smoking was associated with a 4.5-fold risk (95% CI 2.0-10.1) of invasive penile cancer. HPV DNA was detected in 79.8% of tumor specimens, and 69.1% of tumors were HPV16-positive. The proportion of HPV DNA-positive tumors did not vary by any risk factors evaluated. Many risk factors were common for both in situ and invasive disease. However, 3 factors that did not increase the risk for in situ cancer proved significant risk factors for invasive penile cancer: lack of circumcision during childhood, phimosis and cigarette smoking. The high percentage of HPV DNA-positive tumors in our study is consistent with a strong association between HPV infection and the development of penile cancer regardless of circumcision status. Circumcision in early childhood may help prevent penile cancer by eliminating phimosis, a significant risk factor for the disease. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

    Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2005 Feb;53(2):165-77.

    Cancer of the penis. Mosconi AM , Roila F , Gatta G , Theodore C .

    Ospedale Policlinico Monteluce, Perugia, Italy. [email protected]

    Cancer of the penis is rare in Europe, accounting for less than 0.5% of all cancers. Phimosis and poor hygiene are strong risk factors whereas neonatal circumcision is a contributing factor in the prevention of this disease. More than 95% of penile carcinomas are squamous cell carcinomas. Early disease (stage I-II) is curable in most patients, who can be treated by conventional penile amputation or, in selected cases, by organ preserving techniques, including Moh's micrographic surgery, laser ablation or radiation therapy (external-beam, brachytherapy). For more advanced primary tumours, penile amputation is required. Survival of patients with penile cancer is strongly related to the presence and extent of nodal metastases. Bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy is recommended for palpable lymph nodes that persist 3 or more weeks after removal of the primary tumour and a course of antibiotic therapy. In patients with proven inguinal lymph node metastases, bilateral ileoinguinal dissection should be performed. When the nodes are clinically negative, "prophylactic" inguinal lymphadenectomy may be a reasonable approach in patients with invasive tumours (T2 or greater), high grade tumours, or tumours exhibiting vascular invasion. The role of chemotherapy, as adjuvant and neoadjuvant or primary treatment in metastatic disease, needs to be further explored in prospective clinical trials.

    N Engl J Med. 2002 Apr 11;346(15):1105-12

    Male circumcision, penile human papillomavirus infection, and cervical cancer in female partners. Castellsague X , Bosch FX , Munoz N , Meijer CJ , Shah KV , de Sanjose S , Eluf-Neto J , Ngelangel CA , Chichareon S , Smith JS , Herrero R , Moreno V , Franceschi S ; International Agency for Research on Cancer Multicenter Cervical Cancer Study Group .

    Servei d'Epidemiologia i Registre del Cancer, Institut Catala d'Oncologia, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain. [email protected]

    BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether male circumcision reduces the risks of penile human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in the man and of cervical cancer in his female partner. METHODS: We pooled data on 1913 couples enrolled in one of seven case-control studies of cervical carcinoma in situ and cervical cancer in five countries. Circumcision status was self-reported, and the accuracy of the data was confirmed by physical examination at three study sites. The presence or absence of penile HPV DNA was assessed by a polymerase-chain-reaction assay in 1520 men and yielded a valid result in the case of 1139 men (74.9 percent). RESULTS: Penile HPV was detected in 166 of the 847 uncircumcised men (19.6 percent) and in 16 of the 292 circumcised men (5.5 percent). After adjustment for age at first intercourse, lifetime number of sexual partners, and other potential confounders, circumcised men were less likely than uncircumcised men to have HPV infection (odds ratio, 0.37; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.85). Monogamous women whose male partners had six or more sexual partners and were circumcised had a lower risk of cervical cancer than women whose partners were uncircumcised (adjusted odds ratio, 0.42; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.79). Results were similar in the subgroup of men in whom circumcision was confirmed by medical examination. CONCLUSIONS: Male circumcision is associated with a reduced risk of penile HPV infection and, in the case of men with a history of multiple sexual partners, a reduced risk of cervical cancer in their current female partners

  • Oroborus21
    Oroborus21

    Howdy folks,

    I am surprised that no one else has had the balls to say it but the fact is that MOST WOMEN PREFER AN UNCIRCUMSIZED PENIS so if looks are important to you that may be another consideration if you have a newborn boy.

    And yes, the vast majority of U.S. males between ages 25-45 are circumcised as this was the preferred practice of the medical profession in the U.S. during the latter half of the 20th Century.

    -Eduardo

  • kid-A
    kid-A

    MOST WOMEN PREFER AN UNCIRCUMSIZED PENIS

    Uh, I dont think so. Every woman I have discussed this with thinks uncut penises are hideous, and indeed, they are!! LOL

  • Enigma One
    Enigma One

    Many men could also argue they "like the look" of a female circumcision too.

  • kid-A
    kid-A

    Many men could also argue they "like the look" of a female circumcision too. Male circumcision and female circumcision are not even remotely comparable, anatomically or physiologically. The comparision is absurd.

  • Enigma One
    Enigma One

    Kid-A is was meant to be absurd.

    As absurd about the "look" of a penis. It's cultural. Women in Europe are used to "uncut" men and probably prefer "uncut". Women in America are used to "cut". Deciding to mutilate sex organs based on "look" is absurd in my book.

    So Kid-A....a little tongue in cheek humor, ya know?

  • mrsjones5
    mrsjones5

    I have 3 boys and none of them have been circumcised. Yes I read up on it and I decided I didnt want to do that to my boys. My husband wanted my first boy to be circumcised and when to a cousin who was uncircumcised to see if there was any drawnbacks. His cousin told him that he had never had a problem and he was close to being 60. So we didnt do it. I figure as long as my boys keep their penises clean they shouldnt have a problem and if some woman doesnt want to have sex with one of my boys because she has never seen an uncircumcised penis on her.

    Josie

  • Nellie
    Nellie

    I agree that hygiene is not an issue in the debate - if an uncircumcised boy washes himself regularly, there is no more likelihood of an infection that if he were cut. And if a circumcised boy doesn't wash, he too can get an infection.

    However, IMO - anyone who has ever been fortunate enough to "watch" an uncircumcised penis enlarge during foreplay would NEVER want to see it any other way. Just like men like to see a woman do a striptease dance, the unfolding of the glands is a beautiful thing to behold. I couldn't deny my son's future mates that pleasure!

  • coffee_black
    coffee_black

    Funny story.... I was 18... and it was 2 weeks before my wedding...(yeah, I know...wish I had known then) I was assigned a talk in the ministry school...and the subject was circumcision. I didn't know what it was (really...I was a naieve, good doobey dub) I refused to give the talk.. had I given it, I would have had a funnier story to tell.

    Coffee

  • Oroborus21
    Oroborus21

    Whoops! I did mean to say "Circumsized" not un-

    That is definitely the preference and you can ask any gaggle of women if you don't believe me.

    -Ed

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit