Ok before you rant either way here, let me just say that im neutral on this issue. IF u wnna be cut then go ahead, if not then fine. Also, dont try to defend one way or the other, it just ends up beng petty or silly. Im just looking for peoples reactions/feelings towards this news:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6176209.stm

ON a lighter note, does anyone else find it amusing that one of the people who gave comments in this articl is called

Dr. De Cock?

Condoms FTW.

But how many of us live in africa and are to retarded to use a condom?...

I think what theyre trying to say is that circumcision IN GENERAL is safer, its just with the massive HIV problem in Africa, it was the best place to carry out a study.

Cut FTW!!

.

.

.

just razzin' ya, Jack.

quote:Originally posted by M a t t Y:

But how many of us live in Africa and are too retarded to use a condom?

QFT



It's really sad when they have to justify it with crap like this. Wow, you have less chance of getting HIV which you wouldn't be getting anyway since you're smart enough to use condoms. What a boon to being mutilated when you're an infant that can't fight back

quote:Originally posted by Pilsu:

QFT



It's really sad when they have to justify it with crap like this. Wow, you have less chance of getting HIV which you wouldn't be getting anyway since you're smart enough to use condoms. What a boon to being mutilated when you're an infant that can't fight back

Everytime you get your hair cut, do you consider it mutilation?

I knew a cool African. He taught me how to swear in his native language and I showed him how to pick up girls on the sidewalk.

That could be hard on a man's back after awhile Euda.

Im sorry to point it out to you guys, but everywhere is having an increase in HIV, so obviously not all Western people are smart enough to use condoms, and oh look, that number seems to be rising, i wonder if it has anything to do with the whole "oh im not like those retard Africans, i wont catch anything" attitude?

quote:Originally posted by oc6:

That could be hard on a man's back after awhile Euda.

Not when you're working outside in a harness. The views from the side of the building were impressive.

Using condoms + HIV test = just about 100% effective in preventing HIV. Dick chopping= only 50% even if the article is correct.

quote:Originally posted by Euda:

Not when you're working outside in a harness. The views from the side of the building were impressive.

Now that's kinky.

Yeah this is just stupid, get cut because if you are unlucky enough to sleep with someone who is infected, don't use any protection whatsoever you have a slightly reduced risk of contracting it!

Comparing something like a haircut to cutting off a piece of skin on your genitals is just...well...if you cant see hats wrong with that comparison....jeez.

I wondered how long it would take for someone to do a thread on this.

Lets discuss the issue and not descend into a real men v. mutilated debate please (otherwise it'll close this).

Personally I think that using a condom is preferably to surgery. ALL surgery carries risks and unnecessary surgery in Africa probably more so.

Like many people of my generation I had my tonsils removed as an infant on the ground it would prevent tonsillitis. And yes, I must admit I don't get tonsillitis. But your tonsils are there for a reason.

Same goes for your appendix (which again was often removed in infants prophylacticly [sp?] ).

Nor do I think an adult male needs an 'excuse' to get circ'd if he wants. My only problem is with the involuntary circumcision of infants.

I'm uncircumcised, and I don't take too much exception to those who are or those who choose their children to be. I mean, that's not my call to make.

If I had children, I'd go for uncircumcised, but only because I don't see any reason or benefit from doing otherwise.

I doubt circumcision really does lower likeliness of HIV infection, and even if it does, it's a non-issue in the Western world.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

I wondered how long it would take for someone to do a thread on this.

Lets discuss the issue and not descend into a real men v. mutilated debate please (otherwise it'll close this).

Personally I think that using a condom is preferably to surgery. ALL surgery carries risks and unnecessary surgery in Africa probably more so.

Like many people of my generation I had my tonsils removed as an infant on the ground it would prevent tonsillitis. And yes, I must admit I don't get tonsillitis. But your tonsils are there for a reason.

Same goes for your appendix (which again was often removed in infants prophylacticly [sp?] ).

Nor do I think an adult male needs an 'excuse' to get circ'd if he wants. My only problem is with the involuntary circumcision of infants.



Hehehe bet you werent expecting me to make the thread were ya Jack?

Anyway, in my own personal opinion, although i do not agree with the promotion of circumcision without any clear medical proof that its neseccary, i must say that this is compelling evidence to promote it to some degree. Especially in countries where condoms arent widely avaliable/used/too expensive. I mean even if it only cuts the risk down by a small amount, its still going to make some difference.

Mind oyu im saying that whilst sat in my nice warm room, with enough money to buy things like that if i so wished, and wth enough faith in the UK surgical skills. In other countries it could be viewed entirely different.

quote:Using condoms + HIV test = just about 100% effective in preventing HIV. Dick chopping= only 50% even if the article is correct.



Circumcision + condoms + hiv test = %150...?

quote:Yeah this is just stupid, get cut because if you are unlucky enough to sleep with someone who is infected, don't use any protection whatsoever you have a slightly reduced risk of contracting it!



%50 is a bit more than "slight".

quote:Comparing something like a haircut to cutting off a piece of skin on your genitals is just...well...if you cant see hats wrong with that comparison....jeez.



Insanity by default, right? If you can't even explain your position, don't even bother giving it.

circumcision ftw.

1) no nasty smegma shit

2) looks better

3) doesn't hurt if you get it as a baby

quote:The two trials of around 8,000 men took place in Uganda and Kenya were due to finish in July and September 2007 respectively.

quote:The trial in Kenya found a 53% reduction in new HIV infections in heterosexual men who were circumcised while the Ugandan study reported a drop of 48%

Heh, so about 50% of the people in the 'trial' have contracted HIV and are going to die? (Excuse my naiveness... but people die from it yeah?)

[This message has been edited by Mindless Xyzzyean (edited 12-14-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by PirateJoe:

1) no nasty smegma shit

For the love of Pete, it's called HYGIENE you ignorant piece of shit. Pull out your fucking finger nails, there's bacteria and dirt under them

quote:Originally posted by PirateJoe:2) looks better

Looks pretty much the same in the end but hey, opinions

quote:Originally posted by PirateJoe:

3) doesn't hurt if you get it as a baby

What? Yeah it doesn't hurt NOW, it did back then, you just can't remember. And how is that a pro? Oh wow, it didn't hurt to get my appendix mutilated since I was so young I can't remember it

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Everytime you get your hair cut, do you consider it mutilation?

Let's pretend I get it cut in the first place. No since it grows back, doesn't hurt and most importantly, I had a say in the matter. Forced mutilation when you're too stupid to walk yet is definately wrong

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

%50 is a bit more than "slight".

All the luck in the world won't save you in the long run if you're retarted enough to take a risk to begin with. You could argue it being sufficiently beneficial if it provided nigh immunity. Cutting up kids just for this reason would probably give them a false impression that it's okay to not use protection

[This message has been edited by Pilsu (edited 12-14-2006).]

taht means i can have 150 % more unprotected sex and still amybe not get HIV!!!!

that god im cut suckers.

me > anteaters with smegma

^cluntoris^

enjoy ur stds "real natural men"

I don't know...I had a friend who was uncircumsized. He went to a club, found some bitch, brought her home, fucked her, used a condom. End of story right?

Wrong, he had to wake up the next morning early as fuck for PT and then extended duty. Meaning he didn't have time to shower and properly clean his dick. Bacteria collects inside his foreskin and gets infected. Now he is circumsized.

I say it's for the better.

1.) I don't believe this article is correct. As it itself says, every single previous study found the exact opposite. Also note that this is done in Africa, which is a poor country. I'm willing to bet that most of the test subjects didn't wash a lot, and circumcision does help if you don't wash.

2.) Rizzo, your comparison of circumcision to a haircut isn't valid. That's just a cosmetic change, you have a choice in it, and hair grows back. However, circumcision does reduce sensitivity and is done without consent; and, despite what PirateJoe says:

quote:

circumcision ftw.

1) no nasty smegma shit

2) looks better

3) doesn't hurt if you get it as a baby



it does hurt if you get it as a baby, you just can't remember. Babies cry and are mentally scarred for months after.

In addition, I've had smegma exactly once, as a small child. Once I started washing, never again. Looks are a matter of preference, but no girl who's seen my dick has been able to tell if I was cut or not - since they've only seen it erect.

From the last thread on circumcision I posted in:

***

The "looks" argument in favor of being cut is ridiculous, as they both look the same when erect. Also note that every non-American girl I've asked has preferred uncut.

There's no health issue. If you wash, your penis will be fine - cut or uncut.

Sensitivity... sadly, it's true that circumcised guys have less of it. The foreskin has special nerves all of its own, and it's there for a reason... to protect the sensitive glans. It's the same reason the clitoris has a "hood"; I don't think anyone is in favor of cutting THAT off, though.

As an uncircumcised guy, I cannot stand to have anything not soft and lubed touch the head of my penis directly. Cut people, however, can stand to have clothing and other rough material touch it. It's not like that when first cut - you can ask people who got circumcised as adults. It just grows less sensitive as it's continually exposed to harsher treatment.

AGAIN, as posted in the last two threads:

"Circumcision is really barbaric. It has no use. The only two benefits I've ever seen mentioned are a.) lasting longer and b.) health/cleanliness. The first is true, but you can make yourself last longer without chopping a piece of your dick off and losing all that sensitivity. I can get multiple orgasms and last for as long as I want; PC muscle control really helps, as well as just plain control over your body.

The second is complete bullshit. If you don't wash, yeah, you're probably going to have trouble; however, this goes for both circumsized and uncircumsized males.

There are no medical benefits (http://www.circumcision.org/benefits.htm) from circumcision, it decreases sensitivity, and hurts like hell when it is done - even if you can't remember it. This (http://www.circumcision.org/) is a good site to look around at; very professional and objective.

This (http://www.circumcision.org/aap.htm) page in particular is interesting. Take a look at this, for instance:

quote:The AAP statement acknowledges that the foreskin contains "a concentration of specialized sensory cells" and reports that "penile sensation and sexual satisfaction are decreased for circumcised males."

All in all, I'd have to agree with Mephisto. Most who support circumcision are just afraid to admit that they might be deficient - even through no fault of their own - in any area."

***

Not to say that some people may not find circumcision beneficial - for medical reasons or through just plain preferring it. I think people should be given a choice, though.



[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 12-14-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by cluntoris:

taht means i can have 150 % more unprotected sex and still amybe not get HIV!!!!

You're not supposed to have it to begin with. 150% of 0 is still 0. And "maybe".. I could wander into traffic and "maybe" not get hit. It's still not something you should do

quote:Originally posted by CarbonB:

Wrong, he had to wake up the next morning early as fuck for PT and then extended duty. Meaning he didn't have time to shower and properly clean his dick. Bacteria collects inside his foreskin and gets infected. Now he is circumsized.

Maybe he should stop cutting his dick and posting pictures online if he managed to get it infected by not washing for a day

[This message has been edited by Pilsu (edited 12-14-2006).]

^Dude what the fuck are you talking about? No he doesn't not cut his dick, and if you didn't realize there is an opening in your penis, you know that place where piss comes out?

Are you some type of damned moron?

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Insanity by default, right? If you can't even explain your position, don't even bother giving it.

Im HIGHLY suspicious of these figures, and unless its backed up by more research i dont think its entirely truthful.

My position was clear, obviously you didnt get how AMAZED i was at how you compare something like a haircut to genital surgery.

The damning of condom usage by certain ministers in Africa is probably killing more people than the fact some may not be circumcised.

would it not be more practical, and more ethical, to encourage all men to use protection?



"Summary: Thirty-five articles and a number of abstracts have been published in the medical literature looking at the relationship between male circumcision and HIV infection. Study designs have included geographical analysis, studies of high risk patients, partner studies and random population surveys. Most of the studies have been conducted in Africa. A meta-analysis was performed on the 29 published articles where data were available. When the raw data are combined, a man with a circumcised penis is at greater risk of acquiring and transmitting HIV than a man with a non-circumcised penis (odds ratio (OR)=1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.01-1.12). Based on the studies published to date, recommending routine circumcision as a prophylactic measure to prevent HIV infection in Africa, or elsewhere, is scientifically unfounded."

http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/vanhowe4/

Collection of all studies published to date apparently and it found overall the opposite of this one, im not saying this one is right and yours is wrong, im just saying you can look at one and find one conclusion and look at another and see another.

[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 12-14-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by CarbonB:

^Dude what the fuck are you talking about? No he doesn't not cut his dick, and if you didn't realize there is an opening in your penis, you know that place where piss comes out?

Are you some type of damned moron?

The uretha rarely if ever gets infected by simply not washing unless he had like chunks of shit in it. And he skipped washing for one day, not washing for a month or years would be plausible, definately not skipping once

Being uncut in America sucks.My life would be much easier if my parents had me circumcised. I just want to be like everyone else.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

I wondered how long it would take for someone to do a thread on this.

Lets discuss the issue and not descend into a real men v. mutilated debate please (otherwise it'll close this).

Personally I think that using a condom is preferably to surgery. ALL surgery carries risks and unnecessary surgery in Africa probably more so.

Like many people of my generation I had my tonsils removed as an infant on the ground it would prevent tonsillitis. And yes, I must admit I don't get tonsillitis. But your tonsils are there for a reason.

Same goes for your appendix (which again was often removed in infants prophylacticly [sp?] ).

Nor do I think an adult male needs an 'excuse' to get circ'd if he wants. My only problem is with the involuntary circumcision of infants.



It really doesn't matter one way or another.... its not like anyone has ever known what being the other would be, unless you got it post infant/

quote:Originally posted by Donza:

Being uncut in America sucks.My life would be much easier if my parents had me circumcised. I just want to be like everyone else.

You'd find something else to feel insecure about if it wasn't for that

Would you pop your eyes if everyone else was blind? Do you even want friends that judge you based on whether you have a flap of skin on your genitals or not? Skin they won't even see? Do you want a girl that gets so hung up on something natural like it's a deformity? No. So open your eyes and see past the excuses

You guys sure talk about dicks a lot.

Either side has it's positives and negatives but I think we can all agree that the choice should be made by an informed adult.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Everytime you get your hair cut, do you consider it mutilation?

Everytime you get your foreskin cut, does it grow back?

circumcision is a violation of the Hippocratic oath. "Do no harm"

Circumcison is used to remove half the joy of masturbation and sex. So what do you want, the joy of masturbation and sex, or more protection against HIV? Oh wait, if you're circumsised, you didn't get to choose.

im glad i was never cut, then again i dont have much skin, not like some of the wierd dicks you see in porn

quote:Dr Kevin De Cock

Ok, you can have people cut off parts of your dick. Cut off your head and you will also be 99.9% less likely to get cancer of the head. Fuck it, if you only live once, why get circumsized?

quote:Originally posted by vazilizaitsev89:

circumcision is a violation of the Hippocratic oath. "Do no harm"

The entire medical industry is a violation of the Hippocratic oath.

To everyone: okay, I admit my statement was flawed. My bad. =/

Seeing has modern humans have been on earth for over 130,000 years dont you think that if we didnt need it we would have just evolved out of it?

I'm surprised noone here is catching the media's obvious manipulation of the numbers.

Here's how it went regarding each control group:

Circumcised: 22 out of 1393 men contracted HIV | Approx. chance of contracting HIV: 1.6%

Uncircumcised: 47 out of 1391 men contracted HIV | Approx. chance of contracting HIV: 3.4%

Now they just point out the HIV cases (22 vs. 47), and use that to justify their "53% reduction claim". When the fact of the matter is, when looking at the whole picture, getting your knob snipped only decreases your chances of contracting HIV by about 1.8%.

Am I right? Eh, eh?

This kind of debate makes me feel sorry for people who have been cut for medical reasons - as in an inflammation or severe problem. In a few people, it can obstruct everything and become painful.

I am certainly not advocating doing this to babies(worse than piercing their ears, of course).. any body modification should be a personal choice.

quote:Originally posted by Euda:

I knew a cool African. He taught me how to swear in his native language and I showed him how to pick up girls on the sidewalk.

You just increased the rate of AIDS spread in Africa, which grows exponentially. Good on you.

Heh.

Cheers,

MOTO

EDIT: And to Rizzo in a box;

Does the skin on your penis? At least a fucked up hair cut rights itself in time. Cutting off a bit of skin when the infant has no say in it is just wrong.

[This message has been edited by masteroftheobvious (edited 12-14-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Pilsu:

The uretha rarely if ever gets infected by simply not washing unless he had like chunks of shit in it. And he skipped washing for one day, not washing for a month or years would be plausible, definately not skipping once

You would be surprised what happens in a warm place with a lot of moisture. It is kind of a place bacteria likes to grow. Unbathed for a year and you might get an infection? Man shut the fuck up, you have no idea what you are talking about.

quote:Originally posted by CarbonB:

You would be surprised what happens in a warm place with a lot of moisture. It is kind of a place bacteria likes to grow. Unbathed for a year and you might get an infection? Man shut the fuck up, you have no idea what you are talking about. Are you uncircumcised? If so you have no personal experience, so how would you know? I've gone for days without washing it (scout camp) and barely even gotten a little smegma. It'd take a really long time of never washing to manage to get an infection down there. Even if you never washed and you were uncircumcised it's unlikely you'd get infected. I mean after all, soap is a fairly new invention compared to the history of human kind.

quote:Originally posted by PirateJoe:

circumcision ftw.

1) no nasty smegma shit

2) looks better

3) doesn't hurt if you get it as a baby



Have you ever asked a baby if it hurts ? When my son was circumcised shortly after birth, he cried like hell. Seemed like it hurt to me. While it pained me to see him injured, I felt it was much better to get it out of the way while he was infant. I can't imagine having that kind of surgery done when walking around and holding on to pen0rs to pee is a part of daily life.

I personally think circumcised penis' look better. They also seem inherently cleaner (folds of skin on any part of the body can be teeming with bacteria and sweat).

My nephew is uncircumcised, and he's doing just fine. I guess it all comes down to personal preference. *shrugs*

quote:Originally posted by DogBoy:

Seeing has modern humans have been on earth for over 130,000 years dont you think that if we didnt need it we would have just evolved out of it?

The magical ingredient to evolution is MILLIONS of years, not thousands.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:



I personally think circumcised penis' look better. They also seem inherently cleaner (folds of skin on any part of the body can be teeming with bacteria and sweat).



And you are booked in for a vaginoplasty/removal when? Then I think medically speaking the entire vag is little more than a 'fold'.

Anyways people, this threa dis swiftly moving in the direction i don't want.

It is NOT about the rights/wrongs of American birthing practice but whether using circumcision is a valid method for combating AIDS...for those too ignorant or retarded to use condoms.

Btw whoever it was who raised the cost issue for Africa. Assuming you think the operation should be performed by someone half way qualified and in hygienic conditions then the cost of circ'ing probably far out weighs the cost of condoms.

[This message has been edited by jackketch (edited 12-14-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

operation should be performed by someone half way qualified and in hygienic conditions

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

Africa

That's just naive

quote:Originally posted by chubbyman25:

Originally posted by CarbonB:

You would be surprised what happens in a warm place with a lot of moisture. It is kind of a place bacteria likes to grow. Unbathed for a year and you might get an infection? Man shut the fuck up, you have no idea what you are talking about. Are you uncircumcised? If so you have no personal experience, so how would you know? I've gone for days without washing it (scout camp) and barely even gotten a little smegma. It'd take a really long time of never washing to manage to get an infection down there. Even if you never washed and you were uncircumcised it's unlikely you'd get infected. I mean after all, soap is a fairly new invention compared to the history of human kind.

Again since you are a retard and can't read. This was not me, I was circumsized when I was born. My friend was in the military, he is hispanic. He was uncircumsized. He fucks a girl, he doesn't have time to shower, wore a condom, goes to do PT and extended duty. Somehow an infection happend, then he had to get surgery to circumsize his dick.

I'm not a doctor, that was the advice given to him by the United States Army medical team. So please don't tell me it isn't possible to get an infection when he obviously did, and got his foreskin cut off.

it has to get chopped as a child if you have too much of it... fills with urine and such...

quote:Originally posted by nau06248:

it has to get chopped as a child if you have too much of it... fills with urine and such...

Huh?

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

I'm surprised noone here is catching the media's obvious manipulation of the numbers.

Here's how it went regarding each control group:

Circumcised: 22 out of 1393 men contracted HIV | Approx. chance of contracting HIV: 1.6%

Uncircumcised: 47 out of 1391 men contracted HIV | Approx. chance of contracting HIV: 3.4%

Now they just point out the HIV cases (22 vs. 47), and use that to justify their "53% reduction claim". When the fact of the matter is, when looking at the whole picture, getting your knob snipped only decreases your chances of contracting HIV by about 1.8%.

Am I right? Eh, eh?

LOL! Didn't notice that!

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Everytime you get your hair cut, do you consider it mutilation?

No.

Circumcision is more analogous to the removal of an eyelid.

Freedom of choice and the right to refuse medical treatment FTW

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

And you are booked in for a vaginoplasty/removal when? Then I think medically speaking the entire vag is little more than a 'fold'.

Oh, I agree. I wasn't comparing the cleanliness of genitalia, I was simply stating what I prefer. Don't get mad because you've got some extra skin. :P

And my apologies for contributing to the hijacking of this thread.

quote:Originally posted by Rizzo in a box:

Everytime you get your hair cut, do you consider it mutilation?

Your foreskin grows back?

I'm laughing at you.