Another poll!
Opinions on recent news requested.
Indeed it is a poll that could "provoke" some discussion from the 'experts' at Sawatdee.
I just can't think of anything better to do this August 8, 2008!
It was like flipping pages through the dictionary as a youngster, eyes snatching the most interesting index words, when the recent new's text on the Safari browser screen caught my immediate attention. Somehow the only news that these uninformed eyes finally caught from a recent AIDs conference in Mexico City was that of some group connected with it's efforts to promote circumcision as a means to reduce HIV transmission. In their report, basically, scientific evidence can be seen to support the notion that widespread circumcision can reduce HIV infection among populations, and should be practised (required?) in regions like Africa.
The following group of articles are referenced:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 080408.php (The News Based On)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision ("Circumcision" found in the Wikipedia)Male circumcision efforts lag in Africa despite evidence of dramatic impact in preventing HIV
New findings include data on sexual function, risk behaviors in newly-circumcised men; World leaders urged to scale up life-saving procedure for nations at greatest risk
MEXICO CITY, Mexico (4 August 2008) тАФ With millions of lives at stake over the next two decades, researchers and advocates at the AIDS 2008 Conference today called on the global health community to ramp up male circumcision to significantly reduce risk of HIV infection in Africa, and to move quickly to integrate the life-saving procedure into other comprehensive efforts to prevent transmission of the disease in the vulnerable nations of eastern and southern Africa.
At an event organized by Population Services International (PSI) in Mexico City today, speakers cited new findings suggesting that they can overcome many of the concerns donors and governments have given for not making circumcision more widely available to men in the region, among them fears that the procedure could not be done safely in low-resource settings, that it would lead to increased risk-taking behaviors, sexual dysfunction, and a backlash based on cultural and religious sensitivities.
New results from a male circumcision initiative implemented by PSI in Zambia suggest instead that cultural resistance can be overcome and that it is possible to carry out male circumcision (MC) safely and effectively in medically unsophisticated settings, using nurses and clinical officers to do the procedures as part of a comprehensive prevention program.
<<<<MORE>>>>
http://www.economist.com/science/displa ... d=11880458 (And EVEN The Economist (yyaaaaawwwwwwnnnnnn)!)Circumcision
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The neutrality of this article's title and/or subject matter is disputed.
This is a dispute over the neutrality of viewpoints implied by the title, or the subject matter within its scope, rather than the actual facts stated. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page.(June 2008)
This article is about male circumcision. For female circumcision, see Female genital cutting. For Judaism's circumcision ritual, see Brit milah.
Male circumcision is the removal of some or all of the foreskin (prepuce) from the penis.[1] The word "circumcision" comes from Latin circum (meaning "around") and c├жdere (meaning "to cut").
Early depictions of circumcision are found in cave drawings and Ancient Egyptian tombs, though some pictures may be open to interpretation.[2][3][4] Male circumcision is a commandment from God in Judaism.[5] In Islam, though not discussed in the Koran, circumcision is widely practiced and most often considered to be a sunnah.[6] It is also customary in some Christian churches in Africa, including some Oriental Orthodox Churches.[7] According to the World Health Organization (WHO), global estimates suggest that 30% of males are circumcised, of whom two thirds are Muslim.[8] The prevalence of circumcision varies widely between cultures. For example, circumcision is reported to be nearly universal in the Middle East,[9] but under 2% in Scandinavia.[10]
There is scientific evidence for both risks and benefits of circumcision. Advocates of routine neonatal circumcision claim that circumcision provides important health advantages which outweigh the risks, that it has no substantial effects on sexual function, has a complication rate of less than 0.5% when carried out by an experienced physician, and is best performed during the neonatal period. [11] Opponents of routine neonatal circumcision claim that circumcision violates the individual's bodily rights, is medically unnecessary, adversely affects sexual pleasure and performance, and is a practice defended through the use of myths.[12]
The American Medical Association stated in 1999: "Virtually all current policy statements from specialty societies and medical organizations do not recommend routine neonatal circumcision, and support the provision of accurate and unbiased information to parents to inform their choice."[13]
The World Health Organization (WHO; 2007), the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS; 2007), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC; 2008) state that evidence indicates that male circumcision significantly reduces the risk of HIV acquisition by men during penile-vaginal sex, but also state that circumcision only provides partial protection and should not replace other interventions to prevent transmission of HIV.[14][15]Contents [hide]
1 Circumcision procedures
2 Cultures and religions
3 Ethical, psychological and legal considerations
.....
<<<<MORE>>>>
I specified a range of poll options of how it could be leaving any raison d'├кtre behind each option for those that might want to post their opinion.Indeed, amid the gloom about microbicides and vaccines, circumcision is the one bright spot in the field of AIDS prevention. Most forms of prevention have ...
<<<<MORE>>>>
I am not an authority on this but I'm setting the third option as basically where it is today strongly influenced by cultural standards.
Leave male circumcision where it is? Time for a change?
I'm sure next time it will all just be the way it already is. But I read through a lot of it and I voted #1. Basically I am not sure the "scientific" evidence rates good enough, like that for global warming. It just doesn't seem necessary either. Just MHO.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Gone Fishing
