It is statistically rarely the case that an infant requires circumcision, however it is sometimes required in order to alleviate penile problems, most notably Phimosis.
http://adc.bmj.com/content/43/228/200.full.pdf (Table 1 on page two should be the most relevant to the discussion.)
So, can we now please stop the bullshitery of trying to validate an ethics question using tangentially related studies and acknowledge that there exist medical justifications of this procedure? Please? Pretty please?
Edit: Bonus fun fact! New advances indicate that the standard surgical procedure should be replaced by a medicinal approach using topical steroids. Soon this entire discussion will become pointless, yay! http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/berdeu1/
