Penile cancer, for the most part affects only those that have a foreskin. Not completely, mind you, but just about....out of about every 5000 penile cancer patients, only 1 of them will be circumcised - the rest will be uncircumcised. So, it's a little bit different compared to prostate cancer, in that it can be prevented via circumcision, whereas prostate cancer is an inevitability...unless, I guess you remove your prostate.

As for the complication rate listed (I'll read the article sometime tomorrow - can't really read papers right before bed) I assume he extrapolated his/her results, which led to that wide range of realistic complications?

Although drops in circumcisions have been seen over the past 5-6 years, I wouldn't attribute it towards Doctor's knowing "better"...in fact, going by this it appears that some Doctors are actually going the other way and going to encourage it as opposed to their former indifferent stance (also within this article - "The study found a very low rate of complications associated with newborn circumcisions; most were considered mild and no babies died").

I apologize if I'm incoherent or jumping around from topic to topic...it's quite late. I'll edit this or fix it tomorrow, if needed.

Female circumcision is a serious mutilation of the female sexual organ and should be banned in every country since dangerous consequences will likely harm that woman the entire life whereas male circumcision is a medical prevention and healthy in different aspecs. Female and male circumcisions should not be mixed up or compaired in any aspect.

Kasz is right, the only country that performs circumcisions for health reasons is America.

There really is no reason other than cosmetic preference.

Your attitude espouses mutilating babies for the sake of looks that is only the dominant view in ...drum roll please... ONE country.

Why do you consider a male circumcision as a mutilation? It's not disadvantegous, has positive effects and is also used because of religious and traditional reasons.

Circumcision in America IS a mutilation. It prevents a very very small number of cases whose typical prescription is simply to wash better.

The whole idea is like cutting off a kid's earlobes, or removing an outtie bellybutton,.

If by some... you mean... fringe.  Yes.  There have always been fringe doctors who do that kind of stuff.

It's nonsense in a western country though.

Your talking about stopping something that is so unlikely that the chance of botching the prevention method is higher.... and then preventing urinary tract diseases... which 99% of people aren't going to get anyway... and which is cured by antibiotics.

It's just outright stupid.

As for Penile cancer.... are you sure about that?  Everything I've read has said they are basically exactly the same when you take into account the confounding variables

"Circumcision: Whether or not circumcision is a negative risk factor (if it protects against penile cancer) is a very controversial issue.

Circumcision is the removal of a part or all of the foreskin at birth or later on in life. This practice has been suggested as conferring some protection against cancer of the penis by contributing to improved hygiene. However, the penile cancer risk is low in some uncircumcised populations, and the practice of circumcision is strongly associated with socio-ethnic factors which in turn are associated with lessened risk. The consensus among studies that have taken these other factors into account is that circumcision is not of value in preventing cancer of the penis. It is important that the issue of circumcision not distract the public's attention from avoiding known penile cancer risk factors -- having unprotected sexual relations with multiple partners (increasing the likelihood of human papillomavirus infection) and cigarette smoking."

And

In the past, circumcision has been suggested as a way to prevent penile cancer. This was based on studies that reported much lower penile cancer rates among circumcised men than among uncircumcised men. But in many of those studies, the protective effect of circumcision was no longer seen after factors like smegma and phimosis were taken into account.

Most public health researchers believe that the risk of penile cancer is low among uncircumcised men without known risk factors living in the United States. Men who wish to lower their risk of penile cancer can do so by avoiding HPV infection and not smoking. Those who aren't circumcised can also lower their risk of penile cancer by practicing good hygiene. Most experts agree that circumcision should not be recommended solely as a way to prevent penile cancer.

http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/PenileCancer/DetailedGuide/penile-cancer-prevention

In otherwords... you've been reading framed science based on by people with an agenda.

You mean trashleg and...?

Only if there is a reasonably high chance that it/they would cause issues for the child. There really isn't any high risks in not having your baby circumcized, unless of course, negligent parents refuse to teach their child to clean.

Though I have to say, this is an odd comparison; a natural part of the body vs birth defects.

I wish they had as well. I want so, so much for the Bruins to lose. It's petty, I know. But I really want them to lose.

Bah

Female Genital Mutilation is much different, often taking place in extremly poor conditions and at an older age than when circumcision is usually performed (the kind of age where you can remember that sort of thing like a traumatic experience), and is more immediately, distinctly damaging to the health of the women period and to her sex drive in particular, and is more unequivocally bad than circumcision. We're talking about stitching the labia shut and snipping the clit clean off (and to speak of how that's damaging to sex drive, the female clitoris has more nerve endings in it than the penis does altogether), leaving just enough space for the girl to pee until she's married off at least, then the process is somehow reversed as far as the labial stitching goes...

I don't know. I'm circumcised, and it doesn't seem to have bothered me. I'd call this going too far