Reject American Circumcision Propaganda

 

 

Reject American Circumcision Propaganda

 

America has had a Culture of Infant Male Circumcision for over 100 years.  IT now appears to be on a slow decline, with many Americans refusing to have it done to their sons.  However, those Americans that do not want this to happen are desperately trying to promote circumcision not only in the USA but the rest of the world, in particular Africa.  The Truth is that Most Men of the world have never been circumcised, they live healthy long lives with Foreskin intact, and enjoy the pleasures of the Foreskin.  Most recently with the advent of the Internet a World-Wide Anti-Circumcision movement has arisen, and Pro-Circumcision Americans are trying to defend their slow dying cultural practice of male circumcision.   If you look at the facts, Circumcision has Failed Americans in the area that they currently make claims such as Health Benefits. What you will find is that Nations that refuse circumcision, in particular First World nations, have citizens that live longer, have lower infant mortality, lower STI’s and HIV, have healthier children and babies, than the USA which has practised circumcision for over a hundred years.  I have listed some of the evidence below.

 

In 2012 the American Academy of Pediatrics released its Circumcision Policy, which stated that the benefits of circumcision outweighed the risks, and that Health Insurance companies should cover this surgery.  This policy caused worldwide outrage, and leading Pediatricians and Medical Scientists from around the world, wrote to the American Journal of Pediatrics stating the The 2012 Circumcision Policy statement of the AAP was not based in the evidence of Medical Science but was a document based on cultural bias. http://knmg.artsennet.nl/Nieuws/Nieuwsarchief/Nieuwsbericht/International-physicians-protest-against-American-Academy-of-Pediatrics-policy-on-infant-male-circumcision.htm  and http://joseph4gi.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/out-of-line-aap-circumcision-policy.html

 

Americans have claimed they perform infant circumcision because it has health benefits, well lets examine these claims of health benefits against real life epidemiological outcomes. Longevity is universally recognised as one of the most important signs of the health of an individual and the individuals of a nation, if we look at Americans Longevity which is 78yrs, you would expect it to be higher than similar nations that do not practice Circumcision, but in fact the opposite is true. Countries that do not circumcise have much higher longevity. Japan’s Longevity is 81.4yrs, Sweden’s Longevity is 80.6 yrs, Switzerlands Longevity is 80.6years. In fact most of Europe which does not Circumcise has higher longevity than the USA. Even within the USA it has been reported in Press that American Latino's who generally dont circumcise are the longest lived USA citizens. Therefore it is very clear that Infant Circumcision has failed the USA on the health measure of Longevity.

The Latest OECD report on the medical health of nations lists the the top 30 countries with rankings 1 being best outcomes and 30 the worst read as follows: Let's start off by considering the health category, since healthcare is very much in the news in the US, and what's happening with it now so richly illustrates the value of Fullbrook's austere marshalling of stubborn facts. The indicators in this category, along with the United States' ranking, are as follows: life expectancy at birth (24), healthy life expectancy at birth (24 [tied] out of 29), probability of not reaching the age of 60 (25), infant mortality rate (25), obesity (30), practicing physicians per capita (23), acute care hospital beds per capita (25 out of 29), psychiatric care beds per capita (25 out of 29).. On the combined index of health care indicators, the US comes in at 28, just ahead of ... Turkey and Mexico. You would have to agree that if cirumcision is a predictor of health, then it fails miserably in this context, as most nations ranked higher than the USA do not routinely circumcise their males.

Infant mortality is another measure of public health, and the USA does very poorly again compared to its no-circ peers, with much higher infant mortality than the EU nations & Japan. The USA infant mortality rate is 6.4 deaths per live births, versus Sweden 2.8 deaths per live births at and Japan at 3.2 deaths per live births. Again most of non-circumcising Europe has lower infant mortality than the USA. Infant Circumcision has failed the USA on the health measure of Infant Mortality.

Death from infant circumcision. Tragically, Babies die unnecessarily every year in the USA from the complications of circumcision. This is irrefutable evidence, that when babies die from a preventable death, because infant circumcision is an elective procedure, that it is failing America.  Why would any civilised nation perform surgery on a healthy baby that can cause death?

Infant circumcision has also failed America on a UN measure of child-well being:

United Nations measure of child well being = look at the table below:

CHILD WELL-BEING TABLE

1. Netherlands

2. Sweden

3. Denmark

4. Finland

5. Spain

6. Switzerland

7. Norway

8. Italy

9. Republic of Ireland

10. Belgium

11. Germany

12. Canada

13. Greece

14. Poland

15. Czech Republic

16. France

17. Portugal

18. Austria

19. Hungary

20. United States**

The 19 Nations ahead of the USA** are all non-circumcising nations. From this evidence alone it appears than circumcising infants makes zero contribution to child well-being. This data would suggests there are other factors far more important than circumcision which are involved in child well-being, and that infant circumcision has zero contribution to child well-being.
(http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=21566&Cr=unicef&Cr1)

 

Sexually Transmitted Infections is another measure of Public Health where infant circumcision has failed the USA when compared to Non-Circumcision nations of Europe. The USA has 1200% higher HIV infections than No-Circ Finland (in Press) has 500% higher HIV infections than No-Circ Germany & 300% higher HIV infections than no-circ Holland. . The USA has 2.7 times the Syphillus infections than than no-circ Holland. . The USA has 33 times the Gonnoreah infections than than no-circ Holland. . The USA has 19 times the Chlamydia infections than No-Circ Holland. Infant Circumcision has failed the USA on the health measure of STI Infection rates.
(Advocates for Youth data) http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/storage/advfy/documents/fsest.pdf


Another claim by Circumcision proponents is that circumcison prevents penile cancer. Denmark which doesnt circumcise its male infants has lower penile cancer rates than the USA which does. This epidemiological finding suggests there are more important factors than circumcision to preventing penile cancer. Another fail for infant circumcision.

Male anger at infant circumcision is seen in the foreskin restoration movement and the huge Intactivist movement in the USA. That men are restoring their foreskins after being involuntarily circumcsed is more evidence of circumcision's failure.

 

In medical epidemiology we often look to world's best health outcomes, identify the resasons/practices which contribute, and often label this as the gold standard medical practice. Europe which doesnt circumcise its male infants, has healthier infants, boys, and men, than the USA which does circumcise its infants. On these 5 measures alone Non-Circumcision of infants would be considered Gold Standard Medical practice, and it could be said that Infant Circumcision as a public health measure is one big monumental failure in the USA.

In summary, At the very least, and against its own claims "that infant circumcision provides health benefits", infant circumcision has failed America, and if anything one could speculate that the data indicates a correlation with the very opposite (infant circumcision causes poorer health outcomes in first world nations). However, much further detailed and more expensive research would be required to determine the validity of the correlation between infant circumcision and poorer health outcomes in first world nations. Non-Circumcising nations would have zero motivation to allocate resources to this research, and circumcision nations would be averse to devoting reseources to find out that their religious & cultural medical practice is actually harmful to male health. In essence as is the case now, it is a grass-roots movement in America where ordinary people through education and a willingness to go against cultural norms, by protecting one baby at a time from infant circumcision, that will eventually see the practice abolished in the USA.

The onus is on the promoters & profilgators of circumcision to prove otherwise, but on these true life medical outcomes infant circumcision has failed America.

The World Health Organisation 2007 is the source of Longevity and Infant Mortality data. Advocates for youth is the source of STI data:

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/storage/advfy/documents/fsest.pdf