From: gdavis@griffin.uvm.edu (Gary Davis)
Subject: Re: Circumcision etc.
Organization: University of Vermont -- Division of EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:27:42 GMT

In <1hqba0INNds0@gap.caltech.edu> anne@cco.caltech.edu (Anneliese Lilje) writes:

>>Sheryl Says:
>>
>>
>>
>>1.  Recent studies have shown that circumcised men have less chance of
>>   getting penile cancer.

>How COMMON is penile cancer? I would think it is quite rare. If one was
>to use this argument then since 1 out of 9 women will get breast
>cancer in their life all newborn girls should have mastectomies!

Penile cancer is exceptionally rare. One of the rarest of carcinomas.
Infact breast cancer in men is more frequent.
It is however reported that for some reason penile cancer has a high
mortality. This is odd since it is essentially a skin cancer which normally
have cure rates of 90 percent or more. The factor which in most studies
remains unreported is that penile cancer is associated with sexually
transmitted disease and diet. Almost 90% of case are among elderly
men with incomes below the poverty level. One can also infer their
educational is low as well. It is estimated (AAP task force on circ)
that penile cancer in the USA is one in 600 while in other advanced
societies which donot circumcise it is 1 in 100,000.
Clearly some other sociological factor unrelated to circumcision
status must be involved!

>>2.   A small number of men have a problem where the foreskin does not grow
>>    with the penis.  (I forgot the name of this problem)  In this case a
>>    circumcision is medically required.

>And how rare is this? Is the occurrence of this problem more or less 
>frequent than say complications due to the circumcision itself?
	 

Complaints concerning the foreskin are actually rare. The most frequent
difficulty appears to be the inability to fully retract the foreskin in
adult life. This is called phimosis. Usually in the USA the only solution
is circumcision. In other socities streaching and a dilation of
the foreskin opening and a separation of the foreskin from the glans is
the treatment rendered.
Only in a society which does not value the foreskin is every problem
concerning it remedited through its excision.
>>3.  The older a man gets the more painfull a circumcision is.  My sisters

>Hmmmm.... How do you know this? Did someone compare the pain level
>of a newborn who was circumcised to the pain of say a 30 year old? 40
>year old. How do you know this?

>>    boyfriend had to be circumcised when he was in his mid thirties, he
>>    was in the hospital for two weeks.  According to my doctor, that is not
>>    unusual for a man that age.

Your boy friend may have been circumcised,wheather it was needed is another
issue entirely!
>He was hospitalized for the pain???? I'm confused. Please elaborate.

>I have nothing against anyone who wants to have their son circumcised for
>religious regions. I mean, that is the only real reason for
>circumcision.  

>And that's good enough.


How can religious reasons really be good enough either. What ever value
(psychological or tribal) value circumcision at one time played for
both Jews and Moslems is now long over. It is just a lock-step
response to social pressure. 
--
            ******** Gary E. Davis***** WQ1F *****
 The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the
 palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.-H.L.Mencken
Newsgroups: misc.kids,soc.men,alt.atheism,alt.sex.wizards