in

Midwifery Today Community

A home for friends of birth
Attend the Midwifery Today conference in Harrisburg

Foreskins for Keeps

Last post 07-24-2010 2:11 PM by GloriaLemay. 9 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (10 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 02-26-2009 6:33 PM

    Foreskins for Keeps

    Please feel free to share this press release with others.  Gloria

      

     

      Human Rights Group Denounces Latest Circumcision Promotion as a Dangerous Distraction in the HIV Battle

     

    In response to the launch of a new website, www.malecircumcision.org, by Family Health International, WHO, UNAIDS, and AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition to promote male circumcision as a prevention for HIV, the International Coalition for Genital Integrity (ICGI) issues a renewed warning to the world health community that male circumcision is the wrong approach to curb the HIV epidemic in Africa and elsewhere.

     

    West Lafayette, IN (PRWEB) February 26, 2009 -- In response to the launch of a new website, www.malecircumcision.org, by Family Health International, WHO, UNAIDS, and AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition to promote male circumcision as a prevention for HIV, the International Coalition for Genital Integrity (ICGI) issues a renewed warning to the world health community that male circumcision is the wrong approach to curb the HIV epidemic in Africa and elsewhere.

     

    "We are gravely concerned that the push for mass circumcision in Africa will have detrimental consequences, including placing women at greater risk of HIV transmission, creating a false sense of security in circumcised males, and leading to increased risk-compensation behaviors such as no longer using using condoms. Circumcision campaigns will result in huge numbers of circumcision complications. This will severely strain the already burdened healthcare infrastructure," says Dr. John Travis, MD, MPH, and ICGI advisor. "Furthermore, these campaigns will cause the re- direction of money that could be better spent on more effective HIV prevention strategies such as condom distribution and education campaigns."

     

    The recent push for male circumcision has resulted primarily from three studies on adult males in Africa that showed a decrease in HIV in circumcised males during the study period. The studies were conducted in a highly controlled and medicalized environment, were terminated early, were not double blind, and condoms and other safe sex practices were heavily promoted. Consequently, it is unsure if their results were from the surgery, wearing condoms, education, or some other factor. There is no evidence these studies can be extrapolated to the general population. The results of these studies have since been contradicted by other studies from Africa and in the Americas.

     

    "Obviously, the world is desperate for any solution that might help stem the HIV crisis. Unfortunately, circumcision is being treating like popping a pill. This is surgery. It carries the risk of major surgical complications. Male circumcision is not the answer to the HIV crisis,"

    warns Travis. "We find it especially troubling that infant circumcision is also being promoted. This is a severe human rights violation. To surgically remove a part of an infant´s body for a possible benefit, if any, 15-20 years from now when he becomes sexually active, is simply wrong-especially when there are more effective methods available."

     

    For more information on why male circumcision is a dangerous distraction in the battle to fight, health policy leaders and other concerned individuals can go to www.icgi.org/aids or www.circumcisionandhiv.com to learn more.

     

    http://www.glorialemay.com/blog
  • 03-28-2009 7:49 PM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

    Has anyone seen this? Here we go again!!

    Circumcision May Help Prevent More Diseases
    Circumcision may help to prevent genital warts and herpes in men. That's the conclusion of a study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine. Earlier research found that circumcision helped to protect against HIV. That research was done in three African countries. The new study focused on Uganda. It included 3,393 heterosexual teens and men from the original HIV study. About half were randomly chosen to be circumcised. After two years, herpes infection was detected in 114 men who had been circumcised and 153 who had not. Human papilloma virus causes genital warts. The virus was found in 42 circumcised and 80 uncircumcised men. There was no major difference in syphilis infections. The Associated Press wrote about the study.

    Susan
    Moderator

    I get up every morning determined to both change the world and have one hell of a good time. Sometimes this makes planning my day difficult. --E.B. White
  • 03-29-2009 11:16 AM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

    I have addressed this latest round of publicity on my blog at

    www.glorialemay.com/blog

    The only way that American researchers can go to Africa and undertake these diabolical experiments on desperate human beings is because they are being funded by the Bill Gates Foundation.  It's part of our culture that we feel bad about Africa, want to make a difference in the problem, and want the solution to be fast and easy so we can get out of there again.  Thus, you see vaccines and genital cutting as two methods to be suggested.  I just think it's amazing that the NEJM would publish such non-scientific rubbish.   

    http://www.glorialemay.com/blog
  • 03-29-2009 11:28 AM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

     Here's something that was on one of my anti circ lists:

     

    <<It is wise that other predominately non-circumcising nations and societies take a long, hard look at these so-called "studies" done in Africa by pro-circumcision crusaders--mostly conducted/sponsored by Americans, many of them Jews.  By circumcising a study group, and then waiting six months, a year, or two years to compare them with a non-circumcised group, one is proceeding with a number of faulty, ridiculous assumptions. 
     
    The first and most significant is that they assume no change in behavior--that the newly circumcised group will continue copulating just the same as they always have, essentially just the same as the non-circumcised group--like some kind of machines or robots.  They assume behavior (degree of promiscuity in this case) to be a fixed constant. 
     
    Actually, the circumcised group will, in most of these southern/central African studies, then be socially in a minority, and may be ostracized or less eager to engage in sex for a wide variety of reasons--including the very simple fact that sex is no longer as pleasureful as it was before (and they don't like being reminded of the fact that they have been both scarred and desensitized for life).
     
    Another super-obvious problem with these studies is that they rely on self-reporting of the number of copulations in which the subjects are engaged--if they attempt to measure degree of promiscuity at all.  The circumcised group may be very anxious to conceal the fact (even from themselves) that their behavior has been significantly altered by circumcision.  The net result is that the circumcised group is liable to self-report in a highly unreliable fashion, whereas the non-circumcised (natural, intact) group is likely to report their copulations considerably more faithfully. 
     
    Frankly, I for one, don't regard a study based on self-reporting of frequency of copulation, or frequency of changes in sex partners of two groups--one sexually injured and the other uninjured--as reliable; and if no attempt to measure the frequency of copulation or promiscuity of the two groups in a highly STD-infected environment is made, then there is absolutely no value in the study.
     
    The central point is that these silly "studies" measure changes in behavior and attempt to pass them off as changes, improvements in physiology.  By cutting off the toes we cure sprained ankles or athletes foot--people won't be walking quite so often or so far, or needing to clean between their toes, will they?  So much for the crude efforts of those who attempt to salve their guilty consciences for attacking the peace and privacy of babies, denying minors the right of choice regarding the neuro-physiological integrity of their own bodies and beings, beckoning others to join them in their anguished state of guilt.>>
     
    [This posting first appeared at my Yahoo Group, Steps to Laissez-Faire,  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laissezfairesteps/]

    http://www.glorialemay.com/blog
  • 06-14-2009 12:52 PM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

    Thanks for sharing that good news, Dawn.  It's always deeply gratifying to hear that a boy was spared being tortured.

    One of my clients here in Vancouver has put up a blog post on the subject.  

    http://www.listen2yourgut.com/blog/gut/circumcision-good-or-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-1134

    http://www.listen2yourgut.com/blog/gut/circumcision-good-or-bad/comment-page-1/#comment-1134

    I think it's got lots of good information for parents to be.  Gloria Lemay, Vancouver BC

    Blog:  www.glorialemay.com/blog

     

     

    http://www.glorialemay.com/blog
  • 06-29-2009 8:24 PM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

     I've just put some things up on my blog for intactivists:

    1. couple of photos of our Nocirc contingent in the Chicago Pride Parade

    2. article about Marilyn Milos from a Marin County newspaper.

    3. great info from a lawyer at Doctor Opposing Circumcision about the dangers of medical personnel retracting the foreskins of little boys.

    see them at   www.glorialemay.com/blog

    and leave a comment.  Thanks Gloria

    http://www.glorialemay.com/blog
  • 09-05-2009 2:06 PM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

     I've just put up a new blog post called:

    Circumcision: You Wouldn't (Couldn't) Do it to A Dog

    view it at   www.glorialemay.com/blog

    Please add comments.  Gloria

    http://www.glorialemay.com/blog
  • 09-08-2009 1:24 PM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

    Africa, oh isn't that the place where the presidential candidate Zuma of South Africa said that he raped a woman that he knew was HIV-infected (and stated he was then prepared to marry her), but is not concerned about getting HIV because he took a shower afterwards????

    I don't think we should be relying on "scientific" studies of HIV done in Africa!!

    The crux of the circumcision issue is really religious in nature isn't it?

    There would be no question of cutting up peoples genitals if it were not a religious issue.

    So, either God said 3500 years ago that jews should be circumcised, or jews said 3500 years ago that jews should be circumcised.

    One way or the other they were living in the desert with limited access to water. So, if you can't wash your thing before and after because there's not enough water, you might assume that cutting some parts of it off might eliminate the need....

    Understandable I guess, but in any case but dying of thirst would be a greater concern....

    Scientists could better spend their money in Africa on WATER CONSERVATION and Permaculture Education

    in my oh so humble opinion.

  • 07-24-2010 2:11 PM In reply to

    Re: Foreskins for Keeps

    Here's a link to a 1/2 hour talk on "Midwives Speaking up For Baby Boys" on Blog Talk Radio.  You can download it to iTunes, free or listen on your computer.

     

     

    http://www.glorialemay.com/blog
Page 1 of 1 (10 items)
Subscribe to Midwifery Today magazine
Contact UsTerms of UsePrivacy PolicyAbout Us
© 2014 Midwifery Today, Inc.