Friday, July 30, 2010

"...but the tips are huge"


The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says there are "potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision." Basically, in the US, it is the parents decision whether or not to circumcise their boys, and if they choose to do so, it is purely a cosmetic procedure. While doing my pediatrics rotation, I heard this often and was on the fence about whether or not I thought circumcision was a good idea. The one real advantage is circumcision does decrease the spread of HIV, but I would hope my (fictional) children would not be putting themselves at risk anyway. Some say circumcision decreases sensitivity and thus sexual satisfaction, but there is no real evidence of this. The procedure itself is not terrible (the worst part seemed to be that the babies hate being strapped down and unable to move), but if it is unnecessary, should we really subject the boys to this just cause dad's looks that way?
Then I did a urology rotation. I've seen 2 men in their 70s who've received circumcisions because their foreskins had thickened and tightened, one to the point that he couldn't urinate well. And trust me, the procedure in a newborn is nothing compared to the brutality inflicted on an adult. The newborn has no stitches and heals in a couple of days, the adult has stitches all around the penis and takes about 2 weeks to heal - and painfully i'm assuming. I saw another man who had penile cancer and had to have more than half his penis removed. Its almost guaranteed that you won't get penile cancer if you don't have a foreskin. I also saw a man with balanitis xerotica obliterans (BXO), which is a progressive hardening of the tissue on the foreskin and head of the penis. This can cause numerous problems and again is almost exclusively seen in uncircumcised males. These conditions are not very common (penile cancer is actually pretty rare) - and likely why the AAP doesn't recommend "routine" circumcision - but with circumcision you all but decrease the chance to zero. Pediatricians don't really see the problems that a foreskin can cause - they refer them to a urologist to deal with. And after what I've seen with the urologist, I recommend circumcision to all - that foreskin will only cause trouble.

3 comments:

FredR said...

Infant circumcision may or may not prevent these rare but deadly physical problems that can be avoided all together with proper care of the human prepuce and the rest of the body, but it definately increases the risks of your infants developing these other rare and deadly phychological problems associated with sexually traumatising infant.

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/health/effects/autism.html
http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/goldman1/

I think you should broaden your medical fields of knowledge to include psychology and brain chemistry and physiological functions.

deredew said...

Well FredR, I don't know who you are, but I know plenty about psychology/psychiatry and that evidence you presented is circumstantial at best. First off the journal article is based on the fact that the child experiences severe pain as part of the circumcision and this is typically not the case. Anesthesia is used to block the pain. The children I saw didn't react to the actual cutting of the foreskin.
This is a personal blog that I don't expect anyone other than my friends and family to read. If they were to ask my professional opinion on the subject this is exactly what I would tell them. I have researched the subject, discussed it with pediatricians and urologists and formed my own personal/professional opinions which I presented here. Since the evidence doesn't support either side of the argument it will always be a personal opinion. You are entitled to your opinion but don't comment on my blog that my opinion "may or may not" be true, but yours "definitely" is. And don't criticize my "medical fields of knowledge" when you don't know anything about me. No

Hollie said...

I'm all for circumcision because the alternate looks like an elephant trunk...or so I'm told. Is that a good enough reason?