CDC says circumcision benefits outweigh risks

[sparkles]

From the NY Times:
"Doctors should start telling sexually active teenage boys who aren’t circumcised that if they have the surgery, they can reduce their risk of contracting H.I.V. and other sexually transmitted infections from their female partners, federal health officials propose.

Similar counseling is urged for adult heterosexual men who remain uncircumcised and for expectant parents who will be making a decision about newborn circumcision if they have a boy, according to the new recommendations, proposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/circumcision-guidelines-target-teenagers/?_r=0

What do you all think about this?

Would you have your sons circumcised?

Does this decision have any impact on that?

If you are uncircumcised would you ever consider getting circumcised?

[Pensive]

Sounds like a load of pseudo-medical crap to me. There is no reduction in risk of STI. Also why do they specify only hetero males?

Finding it difficult to believe this is a credible story tbh.

Would I mutilate my wonderful healthy infants genitals, comprising their ability to have as fulfilling a sexual life when they're older? No. It's child abuse.

[TroyH]

Interesting. I'd like to know why circumcision has that effect if it does. I've always been torn on this whole topic. It does feel like a morally wrong practice but if there is solid evidence that show its benefits then I supposed it would be a prudent practice. Who knows what I'll have done to my kids, too early to decide.

Also be aware that this article is an editorial, different from a regular newspaper or news article.

[Typhlosion]

The draft of the recommendations, which will undergo peer review and be subject to public comments for 45 days before being finalized,

Not necessarily so. Plus, this comes from a blog, and should be taken with a grain of salt.

[Emerald Dream]

This is more of a debate topic than anything.

Puberty For All :arrow: Ramblings of the Wise

[sparkles]

Not necessarily so. Plus, this comes from a blog, and should be taken with a grain of salt.

It's from a blog of the NY Times, subject to the same editorial guidelines as the paper. It also is not an op-ed. However, someone was correct in noting that the guidelines are in draft form for 45 days for public comment (as all regulations are).

[CosmicNoodle]

I'm still against circumcision a birth, for fuck sake it's there body, when they are old enough let them decide

[Uranus]

I'm still against circumcision a birth, for fuck sake it's there body, when they are old enough let them decide

This is what I was thinking.
I don't think there is any reason one should be circumcised.... I know some religious people, it is a tradition for them.
And some for certain health reasons they are...
But I don't think that people who are not in those categories need to be circumcised. There's hardly a difference being circumcised or not to whether you would actually get HIV or STD's!
Alot of people say being cut is cleaner.. BULLSHIT! It can be just as clean as a circumcised penis! Joe has a good point.. Let them decided whether want should be circumcised or not! It's not the parents choice! It shouldn't be!

[Karkat]

Ehhh I feel like it should be a 'decide when you're old enough' or 'in case of medical need' thing. Tbh, you can still avoid STDs and HIV by just practicing safe sex ffs

[Miserabilia]

Yes, that'll stop me from getting THE AIDS, getting my d cut up. Lovely.
What a perfect solution.
Like just get over it america, geez.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f0/Circumcision_rates_map.png

[Babs]

Ehh, if I ever had a son, I wouldn't circumcise at birth unless it was some sort of medical emergency, or a great possibility of one. It's just... it'd be weird deciding the fate of a foreskin that's not my own.

[DeadEyes]

That old (ridiculous) argument again.

[ImCoolBeans]

The CDC also allowed Ebola to spread within our borders and didn't follow correct protocol. Very trustworthy, right?

[phuckphace]

I've got a better idea: don't have sex with strangers or those with ambiguous sexual histories, or, dare I say it, stay in a monogamous relationship or keep it in your pants.

Posts published by Roni Caryn Rabin

oy vey! now there's an interesting angle to consider :lol3:

[Horatio Nelson]

The CDC also allowed Ebola to spread within our borders and didn't follow correct protocol. Very trustworthy, right?

Hah

I've got a better idea: don't have sex with strangers or those with ambiguous sexual histories, or, dare I say it, stay in a monogamous relationship or keep it in your pants.

Truth. This seems to be a hard concept for a lot of people.

[sparkles]

The CDC also allowed Ebola to spread within our borders and didn't follow correct protocol. Very trustworthy, right?

That was the hospital in Texas' fault, not CDC. They said they were prepared and knew how to contain it. Kind of funny how Texas is all for "states rights" and "smaller federal government" until they need it. CDC fixed the problem by then sending the patients to the special treatment units in Atlanta and Omaha.

[ImCoolBeans]

That was the hospital in Texas' fault, not CDC. They said they were prepared and knew how to contain it. Kind of funny how Texas is all for "states rights" and "smaller federal government" until they need it. CDC fixed the problem by then sending the patients to the special treatment units in Atlanta and Omaha.

The CDC told a possibly infected nurse that it was safe to fly on a commercial airplane carrying 132 passengers, after acknowledging that she was in contact with an Ebola patient, and showing early signs of contracting it. That's pretty irresponsible. Don't want to get too off topic, just saying that maybe they aren't the perfect authority figure on everything.

[phuckphace]

daily reminder that there are people who actually say to themselves "oh look a hole, I'd better fuck it"

once upon a time we put them in mental wards but now we just tell them to get their dicks snipped :lol3:

[MercenaryMarksman]

The CDC told a possibly infected nurse that it was safe to fly on a commercial airplane carrying 132 passengers, after acknowledging that she was in contact with an Ebola patient, and showing early signs of contracting it. That's pretty irresponsible. Don't want to get too off topic, just saying that maybe they aren't the perfect authority figure on everything.

That is complete B.S.
The cdc told her to stay at home and she did not. Check your sources before you say anything.

[sparkles]

That is complete B.S.
The cdc told her to stay at home and she did not. Check your sources before you say anything.

They did allow her to travel, but she said she was not showing symptoms. No symptoms = no transmission.

[ImCoolBeans]

That is complete B.S.
The cdc told her to stay at home and she did not. Check your sources before you say anything.

They allowed her to fly, and they even notified the airline that they were allowing her to. Then had to go through the trouble of tracking down everybody who she could have possibly come in contact with.

Here is an article about it: http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/amber-vinson-ebola
Amber Vinson called the Centers for Disease Control, on Monday, to say that she had a temperature of 99.5 degrees and planned to get on a commercial flight from Cleveland to Dallas; should she? Vinson, a nurse, had cared for Thomas Eric Duncan, a patient with Ebola, in Dallas—she had put a catheter in him and been in close contact when he was vomiting and in the throes of diarrhea. The day before Vinson made her call, one of her colleagues, Nina Pham, had tested positive for Ebola. There was, supposedly, a system in place for monitoring Duncan’s contacts. And yet, as the C.D.C. confirmed late on Wednesday, the official Vinson spoke to cleared her to fly. Vinson got on Frontier Airlines Flight 1143, with a hundred and thirty-two other passengers. She landed in Dallas at 8:16 P.M.. The next morning, her fever was worse; around midnight, she tested positive for Ebola.

Read about it on any credible news source, they'll tell you the same story.
Maybe you should check your sources before you say anything :rolleyes:

[SethfromMI]

I was circumcised at birth and I am glad. i hear it is incredibly painful to do when you are older.
I don't know if it is more hygienic or not. I probably would have my son get circumcised unless my wife was just very opposed to it.

[Jaseblader]

From the NY Times:
"Doctors should start telling sexually active teenage boys who aren’t circumcised that if they have the surgery, they can reduce their risk of contracting H.I.V. and other sexually transmitted infections from their female partners, federal health officials propose.

Similar counseling is urged for adult heterosexual men who remain uncircumcised and for expectant parents who will be making a decision about newborn circumcision if they have a boy, according to the new recommendations, proposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/circumcision-guidelines-target-teenagers/?_r=0

What do you all think about this?

Would you have your sons circumcised?

Does this decision have any impact on that?

If you are uncircumcised would you ever consider getting circumcised?

Sounds like a load of pseudo-medical crap to me. There is no reduction in risk of STI. Also why do they specify only hetero males?

Finding it difficult to believe this is a credible story tbh.

Would I mutilate my wonderful healthy infants genitals, comprising their ability to have as fulfilling a sexual life when they're older? No. It's child abuse.
So much agreement
I'd never circumcise my children

[Stronk Serb]

Dear CDC, you know what else stops the spread of AIDS and STDs much more effectively? Chastity, use of protection and not having sex with people you barely know. If they would hand out free condoms, make a awerness campaign against sex with strangers, the rates would drop down.

[phuckphace]

any awareness campaign dedicated to warning people about the danger of screwing strangers should use Captain Obvious as its mascot

[fairmaiden]

Wait until they're old enough to make a decision. I'm highly dubious of the news report or whatever it is. But taking the pain thing into account, I really don't know.

If it's done, (to reduce risk of infection) it should be done in a proper hospital.

[Malibu_Barbie]

Dear CDC, I have a solution for reducing the chances of contracting STDs: Use a condom instead of: :guillotine:

[Abyssal Echo]

[QUOTE=sparkles;3000834]From the NY Times:
"Doctors should start telling sexually active teenage boys who aren’t circumcised that if they have the surgery, they can reduce their risk of contracting H.I.V. and other sexually transmitted infections from their female partners, federal health officials propose.

Similar counseling is urged for adult heterosexual men who remain uncircumcised and for expectant parents who will be making a decision about newborn circumcision if they have a boy, according to the new recommendations, proposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/circumcision-guidelines-target-teenagers/?_r=0

What do you all think about this? I think this is a bunch of Bull Shit ! sounds like a way to promote circumcision to me. All that does is put money in the doctors pocket.

Would you have your sons circumcised? No!

Does this decision have any impact on that? No

If you are uncircumcised would you ever consider getting circumcised? Hell No!

[Korashk]

Unless they have new evidence showing that what they claim is actually true, then it's all bullshit. The CDC bases their judgment on a study conducted in Africa a few decades ago that concluded that circumcision reduces the risk of contracting HIV during sexual activity. That study has utterly failed to hold up to scientific standards after review and is not evidence to support their claim.

[Saint of Sinners]

I'm just calling bullshit, sorry. Not enough evidence, also you don't see the health authorities of other countries recommending it for that reason.

Just some old circumcised guys at the cdc wanting to spread the misery imo. No offense.

[Beth]

Ehhh I feel like it should be a 'decide when you're old enough' or 'in case of medical need' thing. Tbh, you can still avoid STDs and HIV by just practicing safe sex ffs

I agree with Ren. A baby boys penis should never be hacked up just for the prevention of future problems that may or may not occur. I believe the decision must be his when he is old enough unless complications occurs earlier in life. Then at this time a decision must be made by the parents after consulting with the Dr.what is best for the baby.