Cicumsission question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tony
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 33
  • Views Views 8K
Status
Not open for further replies.
Speaking from a medical perspective, male circumcision really doesn't have any medical benefits. Every benefit ever claimed has since been disproven. 80% of the world's men are not circumcised and have no problems.

I can't speak as a Muslim, but I do know that many Muslims do not circumcise and are just as committed to their faith. This is an article by a Muslim scholar who opposes circumcision


I can't argue with your religion, but I can tell you facts- it's not a health issue, and not all Muslims do it. Plus, wouldn't it be more meaningful if a man decided it for himself as a fully-understanding adult?


find it bizarre that the guy in this link is saying that believing hadiths amount to blasphemy, cant argue with his statement that circ could be tantamount to mutilation but Qur'an only islam is a strange concept
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The article you post is from 2008 published in 2009, here is what the National institute of health and the New England Journal Of Medicine have to say about it as of 2009

more on the topic can be seen from the National institute of health or the New England Journal of Medicine Reference: AAR Tobian et al. Male circumcision for the prevention of HSV-2 and HPV infections and syphilis. New England Journal of Medicine. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0802556 (2009).

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-mcr032409.php


Public release date: 25-Mar-2009
[ Print Article | E-mail Article | Close Window ]

Contact: Kathy Stover
[email protected]
301-402-1663
NIH/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Male circumcision reduces risk of genital herpes and HPV infection, but not syphilis

Heterosexual men who undergo medical circumcision can significantly reduce their risk of acquiring two common sexually transmitted infections--herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2), the cause of genital herpes, and human papillomavirus (HPV), which can cause cancer and genital warts, according to a report in the March 26 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). In the study, circumcision had no effect on their risk of becoming infected with the bacterium that causes syphilis, however.
The findings build upon earlier clinical research funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), part of the NIH, which found that circumcision decreases a man's risk of acquiring HIV infection through heterosexual intercourse by more than 50 percent (http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/newsreleases/2006/AMC12_06.htm).
"Medically supervised adult male circumcision is a scientifically proven method for reducing a man's risk of acquiring HIV infection through heterosexual intercourse," says NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. "This new research provides compelling evidence that circumcision can provide some protection against genital herpes and human papillomavirus infections as well."
The study was conducted by scientists at the Rakai Health Sciences Program in Uganda in collaboration with researchers at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda, and NIAID's Division of Intramural Research. The collaborators examined samples from two parallel clinical trials in Rakai that successfully proved male circumcision as an HIV prevention method and also assessed the surgical procedure's ability to prevent other sexually transmitted infections, including syphilis and HSV-2. These infections cause genital ulcers and are associated with an increased risk of HIV acquisition. The research team also assessed circumcision's effect on HPV infections, which can cause anal, cervical and penile cancers and genital warts.
The two trials, one funded by NIAID and the other by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, enrolled 3,393 uncircumcised men between the ages of 15 and 49 who initially tested negative for both HIV and HSV-2. The men were assigned at random to one of two study groups: 1,684 received immediate circumcision performed by trained medical professionals in an outpatient setting (intervention group); and 1,709 received medical circumcision after a delay of 24 months (control group). The researchers evaluated the volunteers at six, 12 and 24 months for HSV-2 and syphilis infection. Additionally, a subgroup of 697 volunteers (352 participants in the intervention group; 345 in the control group) was evaluated for HPV infection at enrollment and at 24 months.
In analyzing the effect of circumcision on HSV-2 acquisition across both studies, the researchers found that the cumulative probability of HSV-2 infection was significantly lower among those volunteers who received immediate circumcision (7.8 percent) than among those in the control group who were circumcised at 24 months (10.3 percent). Overall, the researchers found that medically supervised circumcision reduced the men's risk of HSV-2 infection by 28 percent.
The combined results from both trials also demonstrated a 35 percent reduction in HPV prevalence among men in the intervention group. In evaluating a subgroup of volunteers at 24 months, high-risk HPV strains associated with certain cancers were detected in 42 of 233 men in the intervention group and in 80 of 287 men in the control group.
Circumcision did not, however, affect the incidence of syphilis. At 24 months, syphilis was detected in 50 men in the intervention group and 45 members of the control group.
"The cumulative scientific evidence supporting the public health value of medically supervised male circumcision is now overwhelming," says Thomas C. Quinn, M.D., study co-investigator, chief of the International HIV/STD Section in NIAID's Laboratory of Immunoregulation and co-author of the study. "This new research confirms the substantial health benefits of male circumcision, including reduced acquisition of HIV, genital herpes, HPV and genital ulcer disease."
&nbspr. David Serwadda, co-principal investigator and dean of Makerere University's School of Public Health, adds that "these findings have significant public health implications for the control of HIV, genital herpes and HPV in areas of high prevalence, such as Africa, and further suggest that efforts to scale-up male circumcision could have tremendous benefit."
"The next focus of our research will be to analyze additional data collected in the Rakai trials to assess the degree to which male circumcision may reduce transmission of HPV to female sexual partners," says Johns Hopkins professor Ronald H. Gray, M.D., co-principal investigator. "This would be of substantial significance because HPV causes cervical cancer."
The biological reasons why circumcision may reduce the risk of HSV-2 and HPV infection, but not syphilis, are not entirely known. HSV-2 and HPV multiply in epithelial cells found in the surface skin of the penis, and the foreskin may facilitate virus entry into those cells. Once circumcision has been performed, the risk of epithelial infection may be reduced, the authors note. Additionally, the analysis used to determine the effects of circumcision on syphilis had limited statistical power, and therefore, it is difficult to draw a firm conclusion as to whether or not circumcision may reduce syphilis incidence, the researchers add.
&nbspuring each clinic visit, volunteers were given physical examinations, counseled on safe sex practices and offered condoms, voluntary HIV counseling and testing. Study staff also interviewed each volunteer to record sociodemographic characteristics and rates of specific sexual risk behaviors. Volunteers who acquired HIV infection during the two clinical trials were referred to Rakai Health Science Program clinics for HIV care funded by the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Volunteers who acquired genital ulcers or syphilis were also provided with appropriate medical care and treatment.
As with most strategies to prevent sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, adult male circumcision is not completely effective. Therefore, the authors note, safe sex practices, including consistent condom use, are still necessary to provide the best protection against such infections.
###​

NIAID conducts and supports research--at NIH, throughout the United States, and worldwide--to study the causes of infectious and immune-mediated diseases, and to develop better means of preventing, diagnosing and treating these illnesses. News releases, fact sheets and other NIAID-related materials are available on the NIAID Web site at http://www.niaid.nih.gov.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH)--The Nation's Medical Research Agency--includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is the primary federal agency for conducting and supporting basic, clinical and translational medical research, and it investigates the causes, treatments and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit http://www.nih.gov.
Reference: AAR Tobian et al. Male circumcision for the prevention of HSV-2 and HPV infections and syphilis. New England Journal of Medicine. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0802556 (2009).
News releases, fact sheets and other NIAID-related materials are available on the NIAID Web site at <http://www.niaid.nih.gov>.


[ Print Article | E-mail Article | Close Window ]
also on other threads I have discussed Smegma/phimosis/ Urinary tract infections and other benefits of circumcision.. There is actually no consensus in the medical community per regard to male circumcision.. remains widely a matter of preference, recommended in some cases, and spoken against in others such as (bleeding diathesis, and certain conditions where the urethra is displaced and the foreskin is used for surgical correction!
all the best
 
Last edited:
Gossamer skye, yes I understand nails etc, and I think maybe the health benefits are good, and I think I am coming round to the idea, just meeded sounding board, however, the things listed are like a choice thing there is no choice for my lads when it comes to circumsission. Would like to think it would be done for Allahs sake but not sure that its only going to be for health reasons. May Allah forgive my doubts


:sl: akhi, I have posted a few articles from reputable Medical journals for you that are current of 2009 not from a David wilton whomever he is, also if you browse the forum, you'd see I have discussed the topic in some detail. I don't believe that you'd be punished for not circumcising your kids, it is a recommendation not an injunction..

I'd also be weary of whom you take your information from. If I were you I'd ask a scholar and a physician...alot of the websites on the web alleging to be Islamic are nothing but tampered with by folks with an agenda!
Anyone can make a percentage about the 5685986% of men who aren't circumcised or how doctors don't recommend it which isn't the case at all, unless s/he went surveying and inspecting the 3 billion men in existence.. in fact doctors tend to leave that decision with the family as it is both Jews and Muslims observe it for religious reasons as well many others for a host of reasons (it isn't a banned procedure, where you have to go on some back ally way) here in the U.S you are asked whether or not you want your children circumcised upon birth.. you can also undergo the procedure at any time and many times for actual medical reasons (which I have listed on other threads)

You must understand in the end the decision is YOURS and no one else's.. you have all the facts to consider.. the procedure itself on children doesn't take more than 7 minutes tops.. If I were you I'd call the pediatrician see his recommendation, most likely if s/he is uptodate will present you with the latest facts and in the end leave the decision making to you..

and Allah swt knows best

:w:
 
Last edited:
Thanks for responses, not sure why people being so short tho, these are my children not some objects that I can give up or do without, its easy to qyestion my belief in the Qur'an or Muhammads (pbuh) teachings, I am genuinely stuck if it was as easy as saying it is my duty then I would not have neede to post at all. Please I need help not just flippant remarks that require little or no thought. It maybe easy to throw up details of Abrahams sacrifices, I am not Abraham and to some extent this is my point. I am prepared to take the suffering and punishment if nescessarry, I just want someone to explain the points I raised. If you have no children please do not bother to post a reply
Closed: Male circumcision in Islam (
multipage-1.gif
1 2 3)
:w:
 
Speaking from a medical perspective, male circumcision really doesn't have any medical benefits. Every benefit ever claimed has since been disproven. 80% of the world's men are not circumcised and have no problems.

I can't speak as a Muslim, but I do know that many Muslims do not circumcise and are just as committed to their faith. This is an article by a Muslim scholar who opposes circumcision


I can't argue with your religion, but I can tell you facts- it's not a health issue, and not all Muslims do it. Plus, wouldn't it be more meaningful if a man decided it for himself as a fully-understanding adult?
is this thread about Sunni perspective or something else?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
is this thread about Sunni perspective or something else?

probably one of those Quran only sects since they are trying to separate themselves from the sunna and we all know why!..

is/he isn't a Muslim then s/he shouldn't be searching for orphan websites to support his/her view.. and the same goes for medicine...

Medicine has always been based above all on patient autonomy first and foremost so even with John dick or harry's article even if opposing the common view, really don't mean much..

I often see in the wee hours these programs that malign physicians especially in regard to home birthing and how medicine has a monopoly on it.. well fact of the matter is women for centuries died in childbirth and we have modern medicine not midwifery to thank for saving millions of them from a certain fate (yes where there are humans there will be human error) but we should weigh the pros and cons .. what will a midwife do for a woman with succenturiate lobe of placenta or a woman with placental abruption or an android pelvis that disables the baby's head from passing through or a placenta increta or breech 10 pds baby? folks should be informed of their choices and then make up their mind not have someone force feed it to them using third party reviews just merely to be objectionable to some religious practices!

:w:
 
I always understood that circumcision (for health reasons) was more widely performed in the US than in the UK.
Is that correct?
 
Doesn't "patient autonomy" mean that it's up to the individual himself to decide what happens (or doesn't happen) to his body?

The "common view" among the medical circles, is that while circumcision may have a few slight benefits, there is not enough evidence that it should be routinely performed. No medical organization in the world recommends routine infant (or child) circumcision.

indeed it is up to the individual where have I stated otherwise?
and it is indeed routinely performed on Muslim and Jewish infant males and others who choose, provided they have none of the afore mentioned medical conditions and/or a bleeding diathesis.. I have seen and partook during my rotations in Ob/GYN/peds up to 7 circumcisions per day.
it is something the parents request the same way many request kosher foods on the menu and the hospital would have to comply with their wishes.. Do you have a problem with that?

all the best
 
i always understood that circumcision (for health reasons) was more widely performed in the us than in the uk.
Is that correct?
....
nobody really knows but organisations campaigning against it estimate that worldwide about one in four males are circumcised. National rates vary widely from about 80% of males in the usa to 2% in sweden, where non-medical circumcision is now illegal in children. In the uk, the number of circumcisions for medical reasons has fallen from 35% of english boys in the 1930s to 6.5% in the 1980s and today some 12,200 such circumcisions are performed annually.
uk:6.5%
usa: 80%

 
Last edited:
This is true. Non-religious circumcision is relatively rare in the UK.

I live in the US, so I feel qualified to speak on American circumcision. We currently circumcise about 56% of our boys, and the rates are slowly dropping. The highest rate was about 90% in the 1970's. Then the medical community said there was no reason to, and the rates dropped. Most people here who still do it don't do it for medical or religious reasons. They do it because they want the son to "look like daddy". Here is a very prestigious American doctor talking about circumcision

Dr. Dean Edell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuu07U2FokQ
I think that the OP confirmed to me that he wanted a Sunni opinion nothing more, thanx muchly in advance of leaving it alone now!
 
Last edited:
:sl:
Sorry to be a kill joy but the actual problem was solved within the first 6 posts (on page 1!)

You know what time it is?

Thread locked.
 
circumcision thread addendum

I just got home didn't have a time to reply back to the lady, if you'd kindly merge the threads and close them after I have clarified a point.

Children are a property of their parents until they become of age, they are what their parents chose for them so long as it does 'No Harm' until they are 18 yrs of age.. (these are the laws here in the United States) if you'd like to confirm you may purchase 'Medical Ethics' ISBN: 1419542095 & read page 5
in some circumstances minors can be emancipated under very stringent guide lines such as pregnancy, military duty, self-support and living independently.. but until such a time what their parents wish for their children from a medical stand point is up to the parents!
Thus if a parent wishes to give their child chemotherapy (even if the child objects, hates treatments, doesn't see improvement) or wish to circumcise their foreskin, then they are entitled to do so.. and it is actually better done as a child, infants have no recollection of the event, and though simple cold vaseline was used to quell, now topical anesthetics can be applied instead with far less complications than if done as an adult!

Again, you don't get to define medical ethics, or religious tents for people.. though we thank much for sharing your two cents...

all the best
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top