The Male Circumcision Controversy
Dr. Maurice Bernstein of the Bioethics Discussion Blog has a knack for getting people to say what they really think. He asks the hard questions … the questions that give you pause, and make you wonder if you really want “go there” in public …
I must admit that I’m a frequent visitor, and I’m about halfway through reading his blog from beginning to end, since I only found him sometime last fall, and he’s been building up that amazing blog for a very long time.
On July 5th, Dr. Bernstein outdid himself. He put up a post entitled: Male Circumcision: Should It Now Be A Crime? In the next 17 days, it accrued 441 comments!!! It could have something to do with Blogger, but on the 17th day, the comments suddenly stopped – so to ensure that the conversation was able to continue playing itself out, Dr. Bernstein made a new post on July 25 – More on the Issue of Male Circumcision – and the comments have resumed in the new location.
In an email exchange between Dr. Bernstein and I, he said:
If these vocal visitors represent a general part of the patient population, I think it is important to recognize that and now I have some new insight to tell my first and second year medical students next month. We have never discussed the issue of infant male circumcision with these students in the past. I think it is important, perhaps for the students to simply look at my blog, to see how explosive the issue is to certain patient populations..so that they can be prepared.
What I’ve been able to gather from the comments is that, in spite of the sheer volume of comments, there are relatively few individuals in the discussion. They seem to be people with strong opinions, and in some cases – extreme opinions. I’ve discussed the issue with several men, and none of those I’ve spoken with are against circumcision – so far. I wonder if perhaps the commenters on Dr. Bernstein’s blog may not really be representative of the “general part of the patient population,” but could perhaps only belong to a small, albeit extremely vocal, minority.
I’d like to hear from those of you with an opinion on Male Circumcision – especially infant male circumcision. Are there medical reasons to promote it? Do you consider it to be a form of genital mutilation, or child abuse? I don’t think that my blog attracts the same crowd as Dr. Bernstein’s blog does, and I would like a more balanced view to present Dr. Bernstein and his medical students with.
My regular readers can ignore the following warning …
Nota bene: If you post a rude comment, or use cursing, name calling, religious slurs, personal slams … etc. … your comment will be deleted! I’m not as patient with rudeness as Dr. Bernstein seems to be, and I’m interested in hearing everyone’s polite opinion – all sorts of opinions – but I’m not interested in having an argument begin in the comment thread. Play nice, and you get to have your say. This blog is not a “democracy.”
July 28th, 2006 at 11:33 am
I think Male Circumcision should just be standard procedure. As far as I’ve heard, it makes things cleaner, less vulnerable to infection, and helps to avoid sexual problems such as premature ejaculation.
I don’t know much on the subject, obviously, but certainly don’t think it’s mutilation or child abuse. I bet the same people that think that circumcision is child abuse are the same people who think that abortion is not murder. We don’t want to get into THAT subject though!!
I’m just going to say this; I think it’s fine and I plan on having it done to any sons I may have. It just seems like the normal, right thing to do. I’m curious to see what others have to say about the subject though…
July 28th, 2006 at 11:44 am
It used to be that male circumsion was thought to have health benefits including cutting down on certain types of infections and cancers. We now know that basic hygeine does the same thing. Its a matter of personal choice. certainly some will look at it is mutilation. I guess you could look at earings the same way.
July 28th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
Moof,
I checked out that discussion about circumsision over at Dr. Berstein’s. I had no idea that this subject was so controversial. I, like Sarah, do not know much on the subject. From the comments over on the other blog, obviously some people know ALOT about it, and have very strong opinions on this. Although I tend to think many of the commenters were the same people over and over…. For me, I had my son circumcised. I thought it would be best hygenically, and also (not to offend anyone with this comment) BUT, I personally think it looks better. Now, that being said, I do think that some type of local pain med should be used. It must be painful to the newborn and I don’t understand why pain medication wouldn’t be provided. But, I do not think it is a form of mutilation. I certainly don’t think that it should be a crime. That is an extremeist point of view.
July 28th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
You know Moof, I had my kids in the early 70s. There really was not much conversation about male circumcision. It was just pretty much a given that your males babies would get circumcised. Both of mine were. I have not ever heard one complaint from either of them nor their wives about it. This talk of child-abuse and genital mutilation in my opinion goes to a far extreme. We did not have our children’s penises cut off for goodness sake. We had some skin removed.
As far as that goes, my husband was circumsized. No problem there with anything whatsoever. I’ve heard these radical stories that men can’t ejaculate or have strong orgasms when they have been circumsized. That sounds laughable to me. That is so not true.
July 28th, 2006 at 1:06 pm
Moof,
I did not read all 446 comments at Dr. Bernstein’s blog. Instead I searched the string “jew” and found several comments that upset me a great deal. It seems to me that it’s impossible to use the words “circumcision” and “abuse” in the same sentence and not to attract anti-semites.
I’ll say only this about it, and then, forgive me but I can’t continue reading this stuff; It upsets me too much: I’m offended by the suggestion that I say what I say about circs because I am a Jew and not because of I apply an unbiased interpretation of the medical literature.
best,
Flea
July 28th, 2006 at 2:12 pm
When I was pregnant with our first, I actually looked for a reason to have our baby circumsized, but could not find one compelling enough for me to favor it. I left it up to my husband who decided NOT to even though he is.
July 28th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
Dear Moof,
This is after a long time. Right from my student days I have been learning that circumcision is associated with a lower risk of penile carcinoma. But that was picking up stuff straight form the book. But when my approach changed to questioning material in the books, I realised that there were many factors leading to penile carcinoma. And in medicine we have learnt that development of a condition depends on the coming together of many factors. So, as much as circucision alone cannot prevent, leaving prepuce behind alone surely cannot cause cancer.
Look at these two excellent articles in wikipedia: Medical analysis of circumcision and Circumcision.
The topics are undoubtedly controversial, but in my opinion like many social customs, the choice of having one for their babies is an individual one. I would not look at it as mutilation but I, surely would not have one for my own baby!!
July 28th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
wow this is a hot topic with some… honestly… I would for the most part leave that decision up to my husband. I will say this, if the hospital refuses to give anastisa or pain control for it and my husband still wants it for our child i would make him watch the education video or the procedure with someone else… cause there is no way any child of mine is going to have a procedure like that done with out pain control…..
with that said… i know my nephew is a young pre-teen getting him to take a bath is a nightmare… argue argue and he’s old enough you have to trust that he is doing the job correctly. so my point is; even if you teach them what they should do, we all know that children have minds of there own. In the end, they will do what they will do, so the clean facter is, in my opinion, an importnat issue…
July 28th, 2006 at 8:02 pm
I personally believe that circumcision is the parent’s choice if it is religious, and I would never try to talk any parent out of doing this. (However, as midwives, my partners and I did encourage the 8th day circ with a mohel if the parents were agreeable..anecdotally we saw the babies coped better and there were fewer problems with bleeding, infection and stress related reactions.) However,there are no compelling reasons to do it in a medically NORMAL infant. There are medical reasons to do it in some infants and older children. Back when I had my children, I would have had it done if one had been male. Now, I don’t think I would, if I have another child, for many reasons. But my main reason would be that if it’s not medically necessary, why should I do it to my baby.
July 28th, 2006 at 8:14 pm
wow. 441 is quite impressive. you almost lose the argument after 20 i think.
July 28th, 2006 at 10:52 pm
God Moof, I just tried reading some of those 466 comments. I had to stop, like Dr. flea, this is to upsetting. I’m beginning to think the whole world might be nuts. Not because they may disagree with me but because they seem violent in their beliefs. I have problems with people who believe everyone but them and those who share their beliefs are wrong and not just wrong but that they are child abuser’s and should be punished? I could real fired up over all this. But, I read enough there to know that many many many of those comments are just the same few people.
July 29th, 2006 at 2:45 am
I guess we are a bit more moderate here. I have two sons who are not circed, like others I saw no compelling reason to have it done. However if I were a member of a religion that did it I would not feel like I was mutilating my sons by having it done. The female version of circumcision is completely different from male circumcision and is mutilation. With the guys all that is removed is a bit of skin, how drastic is that really?
July 29th, 2006 at 4:13 am
Moof, I think circumcision is an unnecessary procedure. Personal hygene is sufficient to prevent infections. Oriental people who do not follow Islam normally do not circumcise their boys. And I don’t think it has made a big difference.
This issue brings to my mind a movie that I saw, in which, during a riot, people belonging to a particular religion are targetted, and circumcision exposes them as belonging to that religion. It really upset me quite a bit.
July 29th, 2006 at 9:19 am
When my first son was born, we opted for infant circumcision but I was informed that the hospital prohibits it because it’s not effective – they had cases wherein the skin closed back.
I went back and forth to Dr. B’s site, trying to read the GM Prohibition Act. Perhaps this was in accordance with a global ban on FGM which I had just blogged a few days ago. The Bill talks more on FGM than male circumcision. I think FGM poses more of a problem than male circumcision because of the way it is done – scissors, can lids and shards of glass!
If an issue has some religious link, one has to take extra care with words, just try to be sensitive with other people’s feelings.
July 29th, 2006 at 2:13 pm
I have had foster children who were, and were not, circumsized. One of my foster sons, who was not circumsized, had a history of infection. On one occasion he had become so ill that he had to be hospitalized. With the regular responsibilities that come from parenting a foster child, I was then faced with making sure that this 11 year old boy did not contract another penile infection while in my care. Maybe you can imagine the emotional and personal discomfort this child felt due to his personal medical history which was compounded by his age. Add to that, being entrusted into the hands of a stranger who is charged with the intimacy of care that should come from one’s biological father and mother.
In light of the fact that infection may indeed be a rare occurance, I decided to have my son circumsized.
As a parent, if there are any life difficulties that I can prevent my children from experiencing then I am committed to exercising that power.
I am not able to make life’s pathway completely free of stones and difficulties for my children. But if there was something that I could have prevented, and my child suffered because of my lack of action, then I would be very upset with myself for not having done all that I could to prevent it.
later…
July 29th, 2006 at 3:07 pm
On a personal note, Moof, since I am, ahem, circumsized, as were most males of my generation, I cannot for a moment understand what all the fuss and fanaticism is about. I do not feel violated, and personally I am happy it was done, since I know men who in middle age were forced to undergo circumcision and it wasn’t a pleasant experience. There are numerous health benefits to circumcision, including the fact that penile cancer is virtually unheard of in circumcized males.
Interesting to read your other comments, and a good question to pose.
Cheers, Ian
July 29th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
Here is a good reason to consider circumcision. And, as a circumcised male and a surgeon, I can say I’ve never seen anyone who has a reason to regret the having had the procedure, and have seen several adult males who, for reasons different from the link I provided, have surely regretted not having had it.
July 29th, 2006 at 11:14 pm
When my son was born in 1966 I did not even question the idea of circumcision. As far as I knew all males were circumcised. I was given the impression that it was healthier for males to be circumcised.
I think that people are now questioning this assumption. I think it is a good idea to question assumptions. Now there are boys that are not being circumcised. My son let me know last year that he wished I had not had him circumcised. As it was far too late to change the past I did not ask him for his reasons.
I would not class circumcision as genital mutilation but I would say it should not be done automatically. If there are reasons of faith or health for individual children to be given infant circumcision than that is a good enough reason.
July 30th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
Circumcision is such a great thing, why keep it from the girls??
July 30th, 2006 at 11:16 pm
I believe it is pretty much unecessary, except in the case of religious covenants.
July 31st, 2006 at 1:49 am
The outer labia on females are just useless flaps of blubber. If we cut them off early, before the girls can object, they will stay much cleaner in the long run. Hey, they will never remember it or even care. For anyone who does object at a later date, we can simply call them the ‘crazy fringe’.
I am certain that science will prove (if it hasn’t already) that females will get fewer infections when they are cleaner. Labia is sort of ugly too. I’ll bet women without labia look better.
July 31st, 2006 at 8:55 am
I’m not going to do as I usually do, and reply to every commenter, since this was not a personal post – but rather an invitation to engage in a civil discussion. I want to thank everyone who left a civil comment, on all sides of the issue. Dr. Bernstein has added the comments on this thread to his own post, and I’m delighted that his students will be able to see both sides of the issue discussed in a more civilized tone.
I couldn’t help but note that the snarky commenter just above (Todd Marks) came from Dr. Bernstein’s blog. From the stats on my three meters, I’m wondering if my two snarky commenters are one and the same person, since they came from the same geographic location. That ruse seemed to be used rather extensively on Dr. Bernstein’s blog.
July 31st, 2006 at 10:26 am
I am a mother of four (2 boys) and a nursing student about to begin my labor/delivery rotation (in 2 weeks). I had both sons circ’d because of asthetic purposes. I am a Christian, fully aware of the Jewish requirement. I did not choose the procedure for religious purposes but I will acknowledge Gods perfect wisdom and that if He commanded it-it must be a good thing (I guess the cleanliness, less infections, etc etc support this). Doc gave us the choice both times. I would be irate if it were “standard practice” and I was not afforded the choice. I am aware of the particulars of the procedure. Although I did not witness it on my own children, I will be witnessing it in clinicals. I will also have the opportunity to hear from families that choose not to circ. It will be interseting to ask them how they came to their decision.
I will say, however, that I think it approaches abuse when it is not done immediately after birth. Waiting until a child is older (over 6 mo or so) seems more cruel, but I have nothing to base that on.
July 31st, 2006 at 4:29 pm
“Infant male circumcision was once considered a preventive health measure and was therefore adopted extensively in Western countries. Current understanding of the benefits, risks and potential harm of this procedure, however, no longer supports this practice for prophylactic health benefit. Routine infant male circumcision performed on a healthy infant is now considered a non-therapeutic and medically unnecessary intervention.”
College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia. Infant Male Circumcision. Jun 2004.
July 31st, 2006 at 6:04 pm
In my opinion the following questions help to put elective, non-therapeutic circumcision of children in context. I hope some of the physicians and medical students reading this blog will respond.
If you were to list all pediatric surgeries in order of decreasing ratio of medical benefits to medical risks and harms, what other surgeries would be close to elective, non-therapeutic circumcision on the list?
In other words, what are two or three pediatric surgeries that have a ratio of medical benefits to medical risks and harms slightly greater than elective, non-therapeutic circumcision and what are two or three pediatric surgeries that have a ratio of medical benefits to medical risks and harms slightly less than elective, non-therapeutic circumcision?
July 31st, 2006 at 6:47 pm
Sid Schwab Says:
July 29th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
And, as a circumcised male and a surgeon, I can say I’ve never seen anyone who has a reason to regret the having had the procedure, and have seen several adult males who, for reasons different from the link I provided, have surely regretted not having had it.
Sid,
You have now. I was circumcised as an infant, and I regret having had the procedure. A healthy part of my body was removed for no justifiable reason. It can never be replaced. I had no choice in the matter. I am resentful about it and I think if you you look around you, you will find that I am not unique.
The adult males you mention, who regretted not having it done, can still have it done. They have a choice.
As for the issue of penile cancer, it is among the rarest types of cancer known. It does occur in circumcised men. And in Denmark, where virtually all the men are intact, there is a lower incidence of penile cancer than in the US where only a small percentage of men are intact.
July 31st, 2006 at 7:40 pm
When I referred to regret, I should have been clearer, I guess. I sympathize with a feeling of loss. However, I meant to suggest that I know of no specific physical consequences. As to those that regretted not having had it done: I meant men who had developed servere infections and HAD to have it done. It’s a much more unpleasant operation for an adult. So, having had complications, and having had to undergo it as adults, they wished they’d had it done as infants.
July 31st, 2006 at 8:50 pm
Sid Schwab Says:
When I referred to regret, I should have been clearer, I guess. I sympathize with a feeling of loss. However, I meant to suggest that I know of no specific physical consequences.
Are you not familiar with such complications such as hemorrhage, infection, meatal stenosis, and scarring? Unfortunately, no records are kept of deaths due to infant circumcision, but I’ve seen estimates as high as 220 per year in the US.
As to those that regretted not having had it done: I meant men who had developed servere infections and HAD to have it done.
Infections are typically treated with antibiotics, not surgery, for most body parts. This is true of penile infections in Europe. Unfortunately, in the US, there seems to be an attitude that the foreskin is a birth defect that should be removed at the least excuse.
It’s a much more unpleasant operation for an adult.
From everything I’ve read, it is quite painful for an infant. Until a few years ago, doctors didn’t believes infants could feel pain and didn’t use anesthetics. Circumcision involves cutting an extremely highly innervated part of the penis. The difference is that an infant can’t tell you that, except by screaming, and when he’s old enough to talk he no longer remembers it. But that doesn’t mean he didn’t suffer mightily.
July 31st, 2006 at 9:25 pm
Sid Schwab Says:
July 31st, 2006 at 7:40 pm
“It’s a much more unpleasant operation for an adult.”
I find it really disturbing when certain doctors continue to dismiss the pain of infant circumcision. Usually it’s the older generation/retired doctors that do this. Younger more educated physicians now understand that circumcision is just as painful for the child as it is for the adult. In fact in most cases it is more painful for the child because he generally gets no local and the adult does. In addition to this, the pain is more intense for the baby because the foreskin is literally fused to the head of the penis in infancy and must be peeled away like a fingernail from the finger before it is cut off. The mature adult has a lose retractable foreskin and it is easier to cut it off since it is not fused to the head of the penis. Maybe you should watch a circ video (with audio) before you make these casual assumptions. The doctor in this clip claims the child is anesthetized.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/161143/routine_infant_circumcision/
July 31st, 2006 at 9:50 pm
DJ … and all the rest of your persona … do not come onto my blog using different names to try to make it look as if there are more of you than there are. If you persist, I will delete your comments, and post your IP address for the world to see.
This post was a call for individuals to offer an opinion, it’s not a forum for the repeated propounding of your views.
Do that on your own blog.
August 1st, 2006 at 2:05 pm
Well, moof warned me but I’ll just post this one more time on this topic, and will ignore cetain ad hominem comments. I’ll simply say this as my last post on the subject. First: I have no dog in the fight. There are things going on in the world that deserve my attention more than this subject, and I’m happy to let people make their own decisions.There’s religion on one side, and religious fervor on the other. So be it. I entered into the discussion because moof asked for comments. No more, no less.
But I’ll say this in conclusion: I’ve witnessed and I’ve done circumcisions on infants and on adults. It’s obvious it hurts in both instances. In the infants I’ve personally seen, they’re back to goo-gooing and doing what babies do in a couple of minutes. The adults are walking slow and unsmiling for about a week. My point? None at all. Just a factual statement from personal observation.
August 1st, 2006 at 6:44 pm
Sid Schwab Says:
There are things going on in the world that deserve my attention more than this subject, and I’m happy to let people make their own decisions.
Dr Schwab’s remarks made me think.
If I may paraphrase him, there are medical conditions that deserve the attention of doctors far more than infant circumcision. If you consider that something like one million infant circumcisions per day are performed in the US, that is a lot of time, resources and money that could be better applied to other things. I have read a great deal on both sides of the issue, and I have yet to come across a good reason for this practice to continue. There is a hoary old cliche that is very applicable here. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Foreskins are a product of eons of natural selection like tonsils, adenoids, and appendixes. Medical science discovered that these organs served a purpose, and removing them on a routine basis was not in the patient’s interest.
August 2nd, 2006 at 3:29 am
leestein wrote: “If you consider that something like one million infant circumcisions per day are performed in the US, …”
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics the number of infant circumcisions performed in the USA is approximately 1.2 million per year. The AAP estimates the annual cost of non-therapeutic infant circumcisions is between $150 and $270 million.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:03 am
Sorry. I had meant to say one million per year. I was tired.
I am pasting below an abstract of a cost benefit analysis from the journal MEDICAL DECISION MAKING:
Medical Decision Making, Vol. 24, No. 6, 584-601 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X04271039
© 2004 Society for Medical Decision Making
A Cost-Utility Analysis of Neonatal Circumcision
Robert S. Van Howe, MD, MS, FAAP
Department of Pediatrics, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Marquette, Michigan
A cost-utility analysis, based on published data from multiple observational studies, comparing boys circumcised at birth and those not circumcised was undertaken using the Quality of Well-being Scale, a Markov analysis, the standard reference case, and a societal perspective. Neonatal circumcision increased incremental costs by $828.42 per patient and resulted in an incremental 15.30 well-years lost per 1000 males. If neonatal circumcision was cost-free, pain-free, and had no immediate complications, it was still more costly than not circumcising. Using sensitivity analysis, it was impossible to arrange a scenario that made neonatal circumcision cost-effective. Neonatal circumcision is not good health policy, and support for it as a medical procedure cannot be justified financially or medically.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:36 am
Those of you who came here from Dr. Bernstein’s blog … enough. Seriously. There are 34 responses as of this time on this thread, and 10 of them came from just the 3 of you.
You’ve made your point. I would like to not have to close the comments, in case some of my less frequent readers drop in; however if you continue, I will do so, and I will also remove your new comments from the thread.
Allow all sides to be heard equally without trying to stack a thread with empty one-sided volume.
Nota bene: This was not intended to be a forum for “discussion,” but a simple call for individual opinions.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:19 am
An obstetrician’s opinion: Circumcision of males are – in my view – child abuse, I see no ethical difference between male and female circumcision. Personally I have never done it and never will.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:14 pm
In the Philippines, male boys who are not circumcised by age 20 are ostracized and looked down by peers. It has something to do with the male “macho” image and personal hygiene (cleanliness in those parts). Years ago, there were a group of local doctors (surgeons, actually) who campaigned for “No to Circumcision!” and I wrote about it. The general trend at present, however, remains unchanged — most fathers still prefer their sons to be circumcised. I know this will sound outrageous to American and European males, but that is how it is here.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:39 pm
Dr. Emer … if you come back, I’d like to hear your own personal opinion, as a physician, and as a man. Thank you.
August 5th, 2006 at 2:12 am
Hello, Moof. I’m back. As a physician, my opinion is to respect the patient’s wants and needs. If they want to be circumcised, then so be it. If they are against it, then it’s ok with me, too. As a man and a future parent, if I were to raise my sons here, I think I would opt that they get circumcised, too. Not forcibly or painfully but according to their own decisions. All the men in my family beginning with my great, great grandpa were circumcised, and there was nothing wrong with them.
Honestly, I see nothing terribly wrong with both options. It’s just a matter of perspective and understanding.
August 5th, 2006 at 8:16 am
Thank your for returning, and for sharing your opinion with us. My own opinion echoes yours exactly.
August 28th, 2006 at 8:40 am
Hi there, metacafe has banned the circumcision video. However it is avaible on google video here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6584757516627632617&hl=en
Also if you would like to embed the video on your site the html code is:
When discussing something as controversial circumcision, I think just watching an actual one can help clear up any of the misconceptions that people may have.
Cheers:-)
August 28th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
No, Painfulquestioning, I would certainly not like to embed that video into my blog.
I will not remove the link, however I want to point out to my readers that this video is apparently of a circumcision done without anesthesia of any sort, and I want to be quite certain to head off any misconceptions by saying that this is not what is regularly done today – since most physicians use something to prevent unnecessary pain.
If we’re going to show pro and cons, please – let’s keep it honest.
August 30th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
What Emer said though, is that he respects the patient’s rights and needs, that if they want to get circumcised, so be it.
But babies can’t sign a consent form. The baby doesn’t want to be circumcised, his parent wants him to be. How is that following the patient’s rights and needs? It’s following the parent’s rights and wants, not the patient’s.
August 31st, 2006 at 2:23 pm
Hi Moof, only in the late 1990’s did the AAP formally recognize that babies feel pain during circumcision and that some form of anesthesia should be used. However even if circumcision could be performed with zero pain for the infant, that still leaves open the medical discussion of what the functions of foreskin are, the ethical discussion of whether parents should have the right to consent to remove a part of their infant, and what effects circumcision has on men’s sexual experiences.
The full uncut 14minute version of the above-mentioned circumcision video is now available on google video. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8212662920114237112&hl=en
In the full version, the Doctor answer the father’s questions, reassures him throughout and provides several of his own pro-circumcision opinions. A link there goes to the site where the circumstances surrounding the video are explained. The video was filmed and originally shared online by an intactivist, however the full version is completely unedited except for muting out the baby’s name.
Here is a video which explains the functions of the prepuce: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/226445/the_functions_of_the_prepuce/
This video was produced by a member of Doctors Opposing Circumcision — however even in acknowledging their own desire to end non-consential circumcision, the science in the video can be evaluated indepedantly from their own opinions. It would be interesting to hear opinions about the video from those with backgrounds in human biology and physiology.
Cheers:-)
September 1st, 2006 at 4:16 am
LINDSAY: Yes, that is mostly what happens here. Parents decide for their sons. No one complains much though. Circumcision is not as unwelcome here as in your country. So even if the boy becomes a man, he is proud (too proud, even!) to have been circumcised and feels thankful for having such wonderful parents. When I talked about respecting patient’s rights, I was talking of male adults who missed the ritual when they were young and wanted it done today. I hope this explanation enlightens you.
February 24th, 2007 at 5:01 am
Seems to be a dead thread now but I’m posting anyhow. I am so very glad I never had to make the decision as my son was very premature. The way his penis looked or even the supposed hygienic reasons for cutting were the least of our concerns. However, I did just view the newborn circumcision on Google and am highly disturbed. To hear that tiny, precious baby scream in raw pain like that for the amount of time he did is just… unthinkable to me. I will never be convinced that little baby was not in horrific and intense pain. I understand people have their religous beliefs and personal reasons but to circ simply because it’s just something most of us do here? Or his penis will look wrong if we don’t? No WAY! SO happy my baby boy never had to hurt like that even if he never remembered a thing. *I* would know I chose to deliberately cause him horrible distress. After viewing the video it is difficult for me to fathom unless there is a very valid and urgent medical excuse which at this time I am not convinced of. My son can make an informed and personal decision as to whether he would like it done. His skin is intact to remove if he wishes.
February 24th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Lilah, thank you for commenting. I just wanted to set the record straight, because the video that you speak about is, indeed, extremely disturbing.
I don’t know what motivated the physicians who used to circumcise infants without giving them something to prevent pain … and frankly, I don’t want to know. It’s always angered me to hear things like “Oh! They can’t feel the pain.” … the very arrogance of that sort of statement knocks the wind out of me. The same thing is repeated for circumcisions and/or abortions. That’s something to think about, no?
I want to say that there doesn’t need to be that sort of pain during circumcision. Conscientious and compassionate physicians use an anesthetic. Afterward, as the penis heals, from my own experience with my 3 sons, each one of them circumcised, there isn’t any pain. I remember being concerned that urine would cause the still unhealed penis to sting, but apparently, it didn’t.
Another thing I want to say is that the video you saw is a propaganda video … I’m sure that if someone who were pro-circumcision made a video, you would see something quite different – because you would see a baby who is not in pain. The only pain involved at that point would be the initial injection of the anesthetic.
The pain an infant experiences – or doesn’t experience – during circumcision depends on the physician.
With the indications for disease prevention, ranging from the prevention of balanitis all the way through apparently offering some protection from the spread of HIV, circumcision by a compassionate physician, in my own opinion, is a wise choice.
February 24th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Hello Moof and thank you for the information. This thread is something I just happed upon while early morning surfing. (How odd the things we run across so unrelated to what we were originally searching.)Since I have never personally witnessed a circumcision of course this video would lead me to believe all of them are performed in this manner. I appreciate your informing me of despised propaganda as I do not care to be ignorant of any subject regardless the topic. However, I am interested in knowing when the conscientious and compassionate physicians began to use an anesthetic. My son was born in ‘86.
June 11th, 2007 at 2:20 am
A young USA doctor named Sayre concluded around 1870 that circumcision cured a number of conditions and prevented others. Over the next 40 odd years, he convinced much of the English speaking middle class that circumcision during boyhood and infancy was desirable. Thus routine infant circ became a part of the proper hospital birth. Being uncircumcised marked one as having been born to impoverished or unsophisticated parents. Much of the powerful emotions circ gives rise to stem from its being an unwitting class marker. Study after study has shown that for men born before 1980 or so, being circumcised is strongly positively correlated with the mother’s education.
In those days, general anesthesia was more dangerous to administer than now, and the only local anesthetic was cocaine. Doctors concluded that it was best to circumcise with no pain management. This conclusion was not challenged until the 1997 publication of a controlled study proving that routine infant circumcision was very painful for baby boys.
While a local anesthetic is often administered nowadays, unanesthetised routine circ still occurs in the USA. (I take no exception to the pain management of circs occuring when the patient is 6 months old or older.) In any event, between 1870 and 2000, something like 150 million baby foreskins were removed without any pain management. In my opinion, this fact calls into question the basic humanity of American obstetrical practice (most Americans were circed by the OB-GYN who delivered them). I am quite sympathetic with the many women who deplore aspects of American childbirth such as shaving the pubic hair, the pre-parturition enema, and the episiotomy.
Much of the popularity of circ in the early 20th century stemmed from doctors and parents forgetting that it is quite normal for the foreskin to be long and unretractable for some years after birth. In the absence of irritation or other discomfort, there is no need to retract the foreskin until penetrative sexual activity begins. (And frankly, that can wait until a man is fully adult!) We now know that circumcision is often an excessively radical treatment for retraction problems and a short frenulum.
RIC markedly reduces UTIs. European intact baby boys have UTI rates comparable to intact American boys. Nevertheless, Europe declines to cut newborn boys. (Nearly all circumcised European men were cut after infancy because of a perceived medical problem, or as adults for aesthetic or sexual reasons.)
In Africa, circumcised men are less likely to contract AIDS. However this fact does not carry over to our world, because the heavily circumcised USA has by far the highest AIDS rate of any advanced country. The foreskin by itself does not promote STDs, such as HPV. Rather, it is the combination of a foreskin with a trashy sex life and a disdain for condoms that puts health at risk.
The first studies of the human foreskin dissected under the microscope appeared in 1990. These studies have shown that the tip of the foreskin, and its inner lining, are richly ennervated and physiologically sophisticated in other ways. Hence the presumption should be that the foreskin contributes materially to a man’s sensations during sexual activity. The jury is still out on the foreskin makes intercourse more pleasant for women.
Many millions of men in Europe, Japan, and Canada are uncircumcised. If the foreskin was fundamentally unhealthy in nations where medical knowledge is good, medical care is readily available, and where daily showering is the norm, a comprehensive survey of urological practice in those nations would reveal that fact. Not only has no such survey been carried out, I have yet to read that such surveys might be desirable. Thus my challenge to all parties to this controversy: draft a careful questionnaire, and post it to several hundred Canadian and UK urology practices.
July 12th, 2008 at 5:09 am
ARTICLE BY: “MR. TRUTH” – A MALE SCIENTIST CIRCUMCISED AS AN ADULT.
PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE POST, IF YOU WANT TO GET THE TRUTH AND
NO LONGER LIVE IN CONFUSION ABOUT THE SUBJECT OF CIRCUMCISION:
Circumcision of all males should be MANDATORY and routine shortly
after birth. Children and adults not circumcised should be told by
Doctors they need to get circumcised. It is not right to leave a
male with foreskin. Foreskin is a female part, and needs to be
removed if a male is to be 100% male. Foreskin is a neutral term
which was derived from what experts in this field used to call it:
‘male labia’. But as to not offend anyone they simply started calling
it “foreskin”. As in forward skin? That tells nothing about
what it really is. A male will never be fully male, and will always
have corruptions in his penile function, either sexually, medically,
hygienically, spiritually and psychologically unless he is
circumcised. Foreskin is a major corruption in being 100% male and
needs to be removed. Despite the lies non-circumcised men and the
insane anti-circ lobbies speak because of their psychological
problems, foreskin, when removed, liberates and put the penis into
100% perfect function. All men who were circumcised as adults will
tell you, they are amazed at how great circumcision is, and wonder
why they weren’t circumcised much earlier. It is because the non-
circumcised penis is used to being trapped instead of being liberated
as is in the circumcised penis which has been normalized by
circumcision. It is like being used to having $3000.00 of cash coming
in per day, but someone tells you something which will cut your
$3000.00 of cash coming in per day and instead give you $300,000.00
of cash per day, permanently! With interest and annuities which
increase yearly and constantly! This is how circumcision advances
the male, in those respects. Narrow-minded people would still be
hesitant to give up the $3000.00/day in trade for $300,000.00/day,
where the interest on it also increases each year. This is the
problem. Don’t listen to those liars and crazy misfits at all
those Anti-Circumcision sites. The most heightened and perfected
state of the penis is when it has been circumcised. Because now it is
100% male in function. The foreskin is the only female part which
doesn’t fully change into anything male. Because it can’t! It was
meant to be removed in the male. There are a lot of confused people
because they mock the truth and decide to invent their own opinions
but still remain troubled. HERE IS THE TRUTH ABOUT MALE AND FEMALE
GENITALIA: During pregnancy all fertilized embryos’ start out
female. It doesn’t matter if the chromosomes favor a male or female,
at the initial stages of pregnancy. All fertilized eggs start out as
female, up into the first trimester. Then, if XY chromosomes become
dominant, then the embryo which is 100% female in design, starts to
modify into a male. As in all the genetic designs for the female
components, start to modify into a male: The labia minora seals
together into the scrotum; the ovaries turn into the testes; the
urethra moves into the clitoris which then elongates into the penis;
the hood of the clitoris and labia minora frenulum which attaches to
the lower side of the clitoris, elongates into the foreskin and
frenulum tag, running downside over the end of the penis past it
several inches. THIS LAST COMPONENT, THE FORESKIN AND FRENULUM TAG
IS THE ONLY FEMALE PART WHICH HAS NOT CHANGED INTO ANYTHING MALE.
It cannot! It is passed onto the male as a burden. Like I said
before, the experts in this field in the past, prior to the
“political correctness” movements had dubbed what people call as
now “foreskin”, as ‘male labia’, because this is what it really is.
This male labia which the male is burdened with, goes against his
masculinity and also is subject to male hormones when it is a
female part! This is why the foreskin and frenulum tag not only
obstructs the functions of the penis but also secretes viruses such
as HPV and Tyson’s Cells which are an open door to HIV and the NUMBER
ONE cause of Cervical Cancer in women. Honest Doctors, Nurses,
Scientists and Researchers who are not on the NWO Payroll, will tell
you, the NUMBER ONE cause of a large build-up of Human Papillion
Virus (HPV) Cells in the vaginas’ and cervixes’ of women diagnosed
with Cervical Cancer is from women who sleep with non-circumcised
men. It is because the foreskin is a female part, in conflict with
male hormones, causing these Viral Cells to manifest. Experts in this
field had always dubbed the foreskin as, “an obstructive, cesspool
sac of viral pathogens, countering the normal functions of the penis.”
This is why in all free nations, for a long time, routine infant
circumcison was classed with vaccination. There shouldn’t even be
a debate about circumcision, it should be routine for all males.
But today, a New World Order Socialist Dicatatorship is coming to
power over all free nations, and especially America is the biggest
target now. All of these “out-spoken” activists, they themselves
have their sons circumcised, but then start up Anti-Circumcision
Sites. So why would they do that? It is because they are among the
many people being paid millions of dollars by the NWO, to spread lies
and confusion to the people, as to weaken and deteriorate them. It
doesn’t matter if the subject is circumcision, woman’s issues, or
economics, or history or anything else. They will pick a topic and
then promote the reversal of the truth concerning these topics by
spreading false information. This is why I felt compelled to write
this article here. As to spread the truth. You probably never read
an article like mine, because many of us Scientists are on the NWO
Payroll to purposely spread lies. I will NEVER be a part of that! I
will promote the truth always, even if I am ostracized and made to
be poor, I will never take the side of liars. A lot of these so-called
“Doctors” and “Health Maintenance Professionals” are on the NWO
Payroll and are now telling people the opposite of the truth, because
they are cowards who fear losing their money. That is when I come
out and write some articles to wake people up. A lot of times your
common sense is correct, but even that can be perverted and
manipulated into confusion. There are a few more things I would
like to state, which are VERY IMPORTANT, in order to break the
other confusions some people have regarding Circumcision.
Another very WRONG, EVIL and IMMORAL LIE being made about the topic
of circumcision, is comparing it to the mutilation of women’s
genitals. A women’s external genitalia is 100% perfect, healthy,
functional, integral and erogenous for her health, hygiene, sexual
and reproductive well-being. By no means shall any person ever dare
to mutilate a woman’s genitalia. That is sick, evil, criminal and
plain out disgusting. You would think people wouldn’t do that, but
certain people who even dare to call themselves human beings actually
do sexually mutilate women! Which should be stopped by force wherever
this is going on world-wide. You would think people wouldn’t commit
these sick vile criminal acts towards women, but since it might go
on here, it is good Congress passed the Female Genital Mutilation
Bill in 1996, making it a Felony punishable up to 30 years in prison
for any offenders caught doing the sick evil crime of mutilating
a woman’s genitals. No matter what a woman’s external genitalia looks
like, it is 100% normal, healthy, and part of her total complete
sexual organs. Whether a woman has very long, meaty and dangling
labia minora/clit hood vagina lips, hanging down several inches past
the labia majora, or virtually nothing at all, but a slit, ALL of
those variations are 100% perfect, 100% female, and 100% healthy and
should NEVER EVER be altered (mutilated) in any way. Because these
sexual organs are required to protect the vagina, urethra, clitoris
and play a major roll in sexual pleasure and orgasm in women. Also
with a complex vascular state of that of the penis. People who are
comparing circumcision (which ONLY refers to males, hence no need to
write “male circumcision”), to Female Genital Mutilation are very
confused, sick and lost people, who have mental illnesses. The
foreskin on the penis, may have some feelings of that of the penile
shaft skin, but it is in no way anything in comparison to the
vascular, erogenous, extremely sensitive, functional and protective
labia and clitoral hood structures. Which are really a complex organ
of special sexual and protective functions extending out of the
vagina and clitoral network of nerves and blood vessels. Which also
connect in terms of nerves and blood vessels deep into the woman’s
body such as the uteral nerves, nipples on the breast, and the upper
regions above her rectum. Comparing a useless foreskin to anything
on a woman’s external genitalia is INSANE!, and a sign of confusion
and mental illness. Regardless to what a woman’s external female
genitalia looks like, whether there is very long and dangling labia
or nothing but a slit, all of those variations are 100% NORMAL and
HEALTHY, and should NEVER EVER be tampered with, or else that will
be mutilation. Women should NEVER worry about what their labia or
commonly called “pussy lips” look like. As a matter of fact women
with such well-endowed vaginas are the envy of other women who don’t.
Woman with large “pussy lips” have bragging rights, women out there
who feel shy about them should not! There is a HUGE MISCONCEPTION
that a woman with long meaty “pussy lips” is some how a “whore” or
a “slut”. This is NOT true! Just like everyone’s bodies are built
differently, so are the many variations of woman’s external genitalia.
Some people are tall, some are short, some are stout, some people
are thin, some people are built. That is because that is how their
genetics are. It isn’t because of what they do. Women with very long
dangling and huge “pussy lips” were just made that way, and is part of
their genetics based on their lineage. It is NOT because they are
“whores”, “sluts” or “used”! I have read some posts of many virgin
women who have very long and huge “pussy lips” which hang down
and dangle several inches, and they are worried that guys will think
they are whores. This is very bad and wrong for men to think women
with well-endowed vaginas’ are some how “sluts”. As a matter of fact
there are many real sluts and whores who were built with “just a
slit” for a vagina, and many men mistakenly think they are “clean
un-used virgins” when they absolutely are not! You’ve heard that
statement, ‘looks can be deceiving’? Well that is a perfect example
of that statement! In no way can circumcision be compared to Female
Genital Mutilation, get that insane thinking out of your head!
The last set of things I want to state is about the foreskin removal
process. Removal of the foreskin on the penis, is being hyped as
something more intense that it really is. The foreskin is so thin,
and while it does have minor nerves and blood vessels, it is a type
of tissue which when incised or clamped the pain is nearly nill, but
more discomfort comes from twisting, stretching and tearing it. It is
for just the few seconds the clamping or ligaturing takes place, after
it bights in, all discomfort instantly disappears. The foreskin is not
as “innervated” as some people claim, the claim that it is, is a HUGE
MYTH. Guys who have been circumcised as infants have the BEST lot
there is, so DO NOT EVER listen to those nutjobs in the Anti-
Circumcision Lobby. Their goal is to mess with your head. They
either have existing psychological disorders or are on the NWO Payroll
to purposely spread lies, to further weaken and deteriorate the
American Infrastructure. Most of the rest of the world has already
fallen under Socialist Dictatorships, America is the last to be
ruined. That is why so much FALSE INFORMATION is being spread now.
Just ignore it. The men in the Anti-Circumcision Lobby, should be
THANKFUL they were circumcised as infants, but since most of them
have psychological disorders, circumcision is just one topic of many
they will use to get some political leverage, money or other
ammenities they choose not to obtain by their own hard work. Some
sinister groups of people are bullshitting a lot of men that they are
“damaged” or “not whole” because they’ve been circumcised, which is
TOTAL LIE. Did you know the base of the umbilical cord tissue
is IDENTICAL to the blood vessels and superficial nerves of the
foreskin? If anything, circumcision liberates and frees the penis
from this appendage of foul useless tissue which should be classed
with the umbilical cord. Babies do cry when the umbilical cord is
pulled forward from the abdomen and clamped. But after the clamp
goes on the nerves and blood vessels seal off, and the pain is gone.
That is why you see that clamp on the newborns abdomen, which later
falls off becomes the “belly button”. This is EXACTLY what happens
when clamping and severing of the foreskin and frenulum takes place.
It is a brief pain, followed by the clamp doing it’s job. The
actually cutting off of the foreskin is painless. Most of the pain
experienced by an infant during circumcision is when his foreskin
needs to be retracted. On the infant it is stuck to the head.
Inserting a smooth probe to free the foreskin from the head of the
penis and the snipping of a small thin skin tag called the frenulum
which attaches between the lower, inner forward region of the
foreskin is where most preparatory pain preceding circumcision takes
place. Which is very brief, less than 45 seconds to a minute. Once
the foreskin is freed and retracted behind the penis head a
protective cap is placed over the head of the penis, called
the ‘Bell’, to protect it, at the rear of this Bell, is a grooved
ring. Then the foreskin is drawn over the Bell and tied to a point,
tight and evenly so that grooved ring is right where the foreskin
meets the shaft skin on the penis. Then a ligature or clamp is placed
onto the outside foreskin into the grooved ring beneath the foreskin.
This clamps off the foreskin completely, just like when clamping the
umbilical cord. There is brief pain when this happens for no longer
than 30 to 60 seconds. Once the clamp or ligature string applied onto
the foreskin into the grooved ring beneath it kicks in, clamping the
foreskin perfectly at that removal line, the infant instantly stops
crying. Because the foreskin turns numb and dies. Exactly with what
happens with the umbilical cord when it is clamped. The actual cutting
is painless. Most of the circumcision processes in infants involve
freeing the foreskin, minor separations and isolating the foreskin
onto the Bell, so either a ligature string or small ring clamp can
be applied onto the foreskin. After that, the procedure is basically
finished. The skin that is trimmed off, is all dead skin, just like
with the umbilical cord. Any cutting or scalpels COME LAST, and are
ONLY used when the foreskin dies or turns necrotic. That is if the
circumcision is done correctly. On infants circumcision is a bit
more painful than with adults, because of the fact that the foreskin
needs to be freed and retracted. On adults, getting circumcised is
less painful than getting a tooth pulled by the Dentist. Because
local anastetic is used with either the Gomco Clamp which is
removed after the circumcision and requires self-dissolving stitches,
being applied onto the clamp and cut line. Or, a Bloodless
Circumcision clamp is used and kept on until it falls off. As if
the foreskin was never even there, with no scar. There’s so much new
technology out today, that adult men getting circumcised is so minor
a procedure it is done on an out-patient basis, in under 20 minutes.
When I got circumcised at 18, it was like the foreskin was never
even there. I healed completely in three weeks, with no apparent
scar. My sex life, hygiene, health and general physical state
improved dramatically and became awesome! My only complaint was why
I wasn’t circumcised when I was an infant. I was a little upset why
I wasn’t circumcised when I was born. Later on I confronted my
mother and asked her why I wasn’t circumcised. Something I wanted to
ask her earlier, but was embarressed about it, even though I had a
lot of problems down there, I was shy about talking about. She told
me, that she wanted me circumcised, but was totally amazed back in
the 1970’s that a PAC Hospital Lobby had introduced a committee
to instruct Doctors otherwise. She was told a LIE that Circumcision
wasn’t necessary. I had so many problems as a young child with my
foreskin and Doctors giving her wrong information. I had my foreskin
torn, and constantly injured because they told her circumcision
wasn’t needed, but that she should retract it and clean it several
times a day. My mother later on requested circumcision, but then
they told her at three years old it might be “bad” for me. I suffered
so much infection, tearing, pain, and annoying penile problems from
my mom being told to do all these things. Later on as a teenager
the foreskin would get infected, and also turn the head all raw
and red. I had lost out in some sexual experiences with girls too.
One time I hid the fact I wasn’t circumcised and tried to have sex,
but it hurt so much and I would lose my erection. Some girls thought
I didn’t like them or were cheating on them. It was a bad deal for
me. So I would bullshit and tell them I have a big exam and am
nervous and can’t focus on anything. Then I’d leave, go home and
have to masturbate with the infected raw inner foreskin over the
head just to get an orgasm. These crazy Anti-Circumcision nutjobs
didn’t effect most Hospitals, because most of them were Court
Ordered to leave. But some Hospitals were successfully targeted
by them. These people are all hypocrites and troublemakers too. I
am very shocked at how much clout they are gaining now in 2008! My
mother said sorry to me, and that she should have just listened to
her instincts and took me to the other Doctor and had me circumcised
when I was 3. My Dad was never a guy who ever wanted to hear anything
about sex or these things. My Mom had problems with being indecisive.
She was just a little worried about having her 3 year old son
circumcised, even though there were options for a painless
circumcision by a Urologist. But she apologized to me, and told me
she had problems of indecision because of all the misinformation,
and that if she could do it all over again she would have made sure
I was circumcised much earlier. After I was circumcised at 18,
everything was so nice! I felt complete, as in what should of not
of been there (foreskin) now gone, liberating my penis into its full
complete structure, without anything obstructing and imprisoning it.
Foreskin is nothing but a useless appendage like the umbilical cord,
and it should be treated as such. Even the non-circumcised guys
know this, but many are irrational about how safe, simple and minor
it is getting circumcised. It’s not even as bad as getting a tooth
pulled for when you get braces. But because circumcision has to do
with the penis, some people make a big deal about all this. Which is
completely irrational.
My recommendations to expectant parents is this: Make sure your son
gets circumcised by a competant Doctor, who has performed many
circumcisions. Make sure when they circumcise your infant son that
they ONLY use the ‘Plasti-Bell Circumcision Clamp/Method’. This
Circumcision Method is SUPERIOR for the best circumcisions, with
no scar, perfect healing and no blood loss at all. Since with the
Plasti-Bell Circumcision Clamp, it is a bloodless circumcision
method, where the plastic bell and ligature string is left onto
where the foreskin is ligatured. The excess skin is trimmed away,
the bell and string are left on, an opening at the end of the Bell
is present to allow for the passage of urine. Within 12 days the
clamp falls off, along with any small excesses of foreskin past the
ligature string. This entire method is SUPERIOR. Also the Plasti-Bell
Circumicsion Clamp is never re-used and comes brand new in the
plastic wrapper package and is all-plastic and disposable, on top of
that very cheap and very effective. However, the Gomco Circumcision
Clamp is all metal, involves clamping then cutting on the
circumcision line, then removal of the clamp. Even though the
blood vessels seal after being clamped, there is a higher risk of
bleeding. The all-steel Gomco Clamp is steralized and re-used, many
of which have bent arm guides and sometimes become out-of-round
in their machining which might compromise the clamping and cosmetic
result. There is always a scar with the Gomco Clamp Method too.
For infant circumcision, ALWAYS request that the Plasti-Bell
Circumcision Method is used or some other type of all-plastic,
bloodless circumcision clamp which stays on and only falls off
when the circumcision is COMPLETELY HEALED. Since on the circumcision
line no actual direct cutting is involved but a string ligature
is placed onto it, the healing and cosmetic result is absolutely
SUPERIOR. As if foreskin wasn’t ever there. This is how many
circumcisions were done, leading to tens of millions of perfectly
circumcised males. But I would recommend avoiding the use of the
Gomco Clamp on you newborn son. For Adult Circumcisions the Gomco
is nominal to use, since self-dissolving stitches are used. But the
Smart Klamp is the larger adult version of the Plasti-Bell
Circumcision Clamp and supercedes the Gomco Clamp, if you are an adult
who is going to get circumcised. Because like the Plasti-Bell on
the infant, the Smart Klamp stays on too and relies on ligaturing
not cutting, until it falls off when the circumcision is completely
healed, with no scar and perfect results. The Smart Klamp has handles
instead of a string which does the ligaturing, and is all-plastic.
The handles are like the handles on a corkscrew opener, but all-
plastic, and simply ligatures the circumcision line after the handles
are locked downward. This provides for better ligaturing than with
just string. String works well on the infant, but for the adult,
something like the Smart Klamp is the best. After the ligature
ring locks onto the foreskin against a ring beneath it ligaturing
the foreskin on the circumcision line, the entire assembly
and the Bell disconnects leaving just a small ring above and below
the foreskin being clamped, The excess skin is trimmed off and the
head is exposed normally as to allow for urination. No stitiches
required. After three weeks the rings simply fall off when it
completely heals, and there’s no evidence of any foreskin ever being
there or even a scar, just a perfect circumcision. The Smart Klamp
is an ingenious, simple, safe, effective and cheap Adult Circumcision
Method, as is the Plasti-Bell for use with Infant Circumcisions, and
is always brand new, fresh from the package, cheap, effective and
disposable. In the 3rd world, the Smart Klamp is very popular and
provides perfect, bloodless and no-scar circumcisions, without any
invasive cutting. Since its system operates on simple permanent
ligature locking, which comes off whole after the circumcision
completely heals. Simplicity is genius. The Gomco Clamp was used
in at least 50% of US circumcisions for, adults, children and
infants. But with advances in material science technology, I strongly
recommend expectant parents of sons to specifically request the
Plasti-Bell Circumcision Clamp/Method. Now for adult or post-infancy
circumcisions, request the Smart Klamp or Tara Klamp, or some type of
ligature-type plastic clamp which provides perfect, bloodless
circumcision, which involves no direct cutting or stitches. Most
people don’t know all these things, then when it comes time to get
circumcised or have their son circumcised, they don’t realize that
hospitals need to honor requests of parents or they will use whatever
they want, UNLESS you specifically tell them to use the Plasti-Bell
Circumcision Method. Many hospitals only use the Plasti-Bell,
because of its superior attributes. But many are still using the
Gomco Clamp, which I really think should be done away with.
If parents truly care for their sons, they will say YES to
circumcision. Frankly, I think it is absurd that “consent” is even
needed. Circumcision should be a mandatory and routine procedure
for all infant males born in any US Hospital without any “consent”
like it had been from 1930 to 1975. After that the circumcision
rate basically stayed at 85% up to now. But with a serious decline
in the American southwest, where many migrant immigrants live. But
overall, the consentual circumcision rate is around 80% by educated
parents and nearly all American-born parents. The Midwest and the
Northeastern States are still at a good circumcision rate of 93%.
Many non-circumcised infants also later get circumcised on an
out-patient basis, and at least 25% of non-circumcised adults later
get circumcised too. So the “offical” circumcision rate might
really be lower than it truly is.
All expectant parents, if they care about their son’s well-being, they
will say YES to circumcision, and request that ONLY the Plasti-Bell
Circumcision Clamp/Method is used. Concerning the pain and discomfort,
it is very brief, and discomfort lasts for no more than a few hours.
Infants heal extremely fast, before you know it, the clamp falls off
and your son is happily circumcised, without any pain or problems
ever again. For the rest of his life he is privelaged by having been
circumcised. If you are wise you will say YES to circumcision and
ignore all the LIES and MYTHS of the Anti-Circumcision New World
Orderites. Lastly, another major source of infant’s cries during
circumcision as is with other procedures in the infancy stage is the
mere fact the infant is strapped down, they absolutely hate that and
start to cry hysterically. Lay people should be careful of what they
think makes an infant cry. Because it is easy to be mislead on what
does. Talk to most any Doctor or Nurse and they will tell you infants
cry more from being born, getting vaccincation shots and being
strapped down than they do overall from being circumcised. Most
Nurses (except the ones on the NWO Payroll of the Anti-Circumcision
Lobby who are being paid to spread lies), will tell you that the same
amount of brief pain when clamping and cutting off of the umbilical
cord happens also when clamping and cutting off of the foreskin, and
that the retracting of the foreskin which takes less than a minute
is really the most painful but very brief part of circumcision.
In the past, this is why lay people weren’t even allowed into the
area where they circumcise infants. Because lay people misunderstand
many things. But today, nothing is sacred or hidden anymore, with the
advent of the Internet and You Tube. There’s a lot of people who
misunderstand what’s really happening during a Circumcision by
interpreting the very brief superficial pain and discomfort as
something far more extreme than it truly is. Just always make sure
ahead of time, that the Doctor to do your infant son’s circumcision
is competent and experienced in performing many infant circumcisions,
using ONLY the Plasti-Bell Circumcision Clamp/Method. A lot of women
also know ALL I have written here, but do not decide to write a
long article but simple say, “ewww foreskin is so gross.” They
don’t mean that to be mean or anything, but because they know all
about what I have written here, they’d rather just say that! I bet
your Grandma knows how important circumcision is for all males more
than a lot of people out today! Because back then everyone took
accuracy and information publishing very seriously. Whether you
were a Pilot, Doctor, Engineer, Scientist, Nurse or a Lay Person, of
any occupation, people took the nuts and bolts of everything and long
hours in accuracy and proficiency very seriously. Today, that isn’t
completely typical, far too many people are not completing the
training and experience to master the basics of their occupation.
While many automated systems are doing their job, many people out
today have not mastered the basics and are dependent on automation
or a third party to do most of their work. This isn’t good, when
people need to be accountable for managing any occupation they work
in, when what they are dependent on fails. The New World Order
Socialists have surely lowered the standards in education and
occupational realms. But that doesn’t mean people should just accept
that, when they can take time to master all of the basics of their
given endeavors on their own time. Typically this is not the case
now, but there’s always exceptional people true to high standards,
regardless of the predictament. The advent of the Internet and access
to much information gives people worldwide a major upper hand. But
unfortunately many people are wasting valuable time on other aspects.
I feel now that I have fulfilled my goal of presenting the facts
about the very wonderful and beneficial procedure of Circumcision,
for which no male should be deprived of. As well as how to initiate
the circumcision process correctly for expectant parents of sons as
well as non-circumcised adult men who are opting to get circumcised.
I HAVE WROTE THIS ARTICLE SO THAT MANY OF THE PEOPLE LOOKING FOR
DIRECT AND HONEST ANSWERS IN A TIME OF CONFUSION AND MISINFORMATION
CAN GET THE TRUTH. SOMETHING WHICH IS BEING MORE AND MORE SHUT OUT
IN THESE NWO TURBULENT TIMES. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE
IS TO MAKE SURE YOU DON’T RUN INTO ANY COMPLICATIONS, PROBLEMS AND
MISHAPS. CIRCUMCISION IS A VERY SAFE, MINOR AND ADVENTAGEOUS
PROCEDURE ALL MALES REGARDLESS OF BACKGROUND, NEED DONE. JUST MAKE
SURE YOU CONSULT AHEAD OF TIME WITH AN EXPERIIENCED AND BOARD-
CERTIFIED OBGYN, PEDIATRICIAN OR SPECIALIST WITH EXPERIENCE IN DOING
MANY CIRCUMCISIONS, PREFERABLE WITH THE PLASTI-BELL TECHNIQUE.
YOU MAY USE THIS ARTICLE FREE OF ANY COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS. MY GOAL
IS TO SPREAD THE TRUTH ONTO THE MASSES SO THEY MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION
AND GET THE FACTS REGARDING THE SUBJECT OF CIRCUMCISION.
If you have any questions or would like to comment about this article, please feel free to e-mail me at:
mistertruth321@yahoo.com
Please keep comments civil.
May 28th, 2010 at 11:12 am
You can definitely see your enthusiasm in the work you write. The world hopes for more passionate writers like you who aren¡¯t afraid to say how they believe. Always go after your heart.
July 30th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
this is great info! really appreciate you posting this on your website.