|
"Routine" circumcision is banned in public hospitals in Australia, in all states except for Queensland. Parents can still have it done, but they have to go to a private hospital. The Children's Commissioner in Tasmania wants to ban it there altogether, and has the support of the head of AMA.
You know as well as I do that basing a circumcision policy on prevalence of cervical cancer in Islam and Jewish cultures doesn't make sense. They kill people for pre-marital sex or adultery in some Islam countries, so it's not a comparison that can be taken seriously. There actually appears to be a genetic component to the lower rate of cervical cancer in Jewish women btw.
You state that circumcision hurts less than as an infant. How many men with a two day old circumcision have you asked? The infection rate is higher and that is documented.
Just because they can't talk doesn't mean they can't feel pain. Just because they won't remember doesn't mean it hasn't affected them, as I already said.
I'd be interested to see a link or reference for the infection rate being higher. I'm fairly sure no adult has died or suffered brain damage following circumcision, because of the coldsore virus, yet this has happened with neonates.
Is anyone here aware of any cases of death following adult circumcision (in a western medical environment). How about gangrene? How about any cases that needed to be revised/repeated? Those complications only seem to occur with newborns.
Even if I knew that my son was at some point in his life going to need to be circumcised, doing it straight after birth would still be the worst possible time. I'd probably wait till he was over ten, or at least until the foreskin had separated from the glans.
And I also (cited months ago in another thread) look a 29 yo mother in the eye and tell her she has Stage 4 cervical cancer.
You're using scare tactics. How about having to tell someone that their son has died or developed gangrene, or suffered penile amputation because of circumcision? It's very rare, but it does happen.
Let's say we could cut cervical cancer deaths by 20% by circumcising all men. What then if we could cut them by 40% by removing the inner labia? They're not strictly necessary, and there are some diseases of the labia that you just can't get if they're not there. This is not just hypothetical - penile cancer has been put forward as a resaon to circumcise newborns, yet vulval cancer is more than twice as common (even breast cancer in men is more common).
You must be into Scientology. Practice medicine a good long time and the concepts fit.
You too lose credibility, on this and other threads when you attack people and oversimplify issues. I'm not into Scientology at all, and believe that their children should be taken away if at significant risk. Allowing parents to have parts of their children's genitals cut off on what I consider to be bogus medical grounds is equally troubling. This has nothing to do with antibiotics or vaccination.
|