Circumcision: Why It's Done, Risks and Recovery
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/302234.php
Reasons given for neonatal circumcision
here are a number of claimed health benefits associated with neonatal circumcision. Below are listed the most common:
Religion: religious circumcision is the most common reason for the procedure
Hygiene: washing the penis is easier without the skin folds of the foreskin, although washing with the foreskin intact is not a particularly difficult procedure
Decreased risk of urinary tract infection: urinary tract infections are more prevalent in uncircumcised men and can lead to kidney problems later in life. However, they are very rare in males under 50 whether circumcised or not
Decrease in risk of sexually transmitted infections (STI): some evidence points to a lower risk of some STIs like HIV (more detail below). One study found that uncircumcised men are twice as likely as circumcised men to develop herpes or gonorrhea, and five times as likely to develop candidiasis or syphilis
Prevention of certain penile problems: in very rare cases, the foreskin can become impossible to retract, or the head of the penis can become inflamed and need surgical intervention (phimosis and balanitis respectively - see page 3)
Decreased risk of penile cancer: cancers of the penis are rare, but they occur more commonly in uncircumcised men. However, it has been estimated that 300,000 circumcisions may be required to prevent one penile cancer per year.
Circumcision and HIV
There is a strong belief that circumcision helps lessen the risks of HIV being transmitted during intercourse.
Research in the field is almost exclusively conducted in Africa, where the need is greatest.
Current literature is split concerning the links between circumcision and the likelihood of contracting HIV.
Findings from research conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa can not necessarily be extrapolated to the Western world. Added to this, the US has one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the industrialized world, despite circumcision being more prevalent here than in many other countries.
The head of the penis and the shaft are covered in dry, external cells. However, the internal membrane of the foreskin has less keratinization (layers of fibrous protein).
The foreskin's underside is constructed differently and is formed of a mucosal membrane. For this reason, some believe it has more potential target sites for HIV.
Some studies have indeed shown that the foreskin's inner membrane could be more susceptible to HIV infection. However, other studies have not demonstrated this. The evidence at this stage is inconclusive.
The foreskin may be more prone to splits and ruptures during intercourse, leaving an open door for pathogens to enter the bloodstream.
A further possibility is that the space between the penis and the foreskin might provide an environment in which a virus can survive for a period of time, raising the risk of infection for the individual and their next partner.
High-level population data does suggest that HIV incidence drops in areas with an increased number of circumcised males. According to the CDC:
Quote:
|
"Countries in Africa and Asia with a prevalence of male circumcision of less than 20% have HIV infection prevalences several times higher than those in countries in these regions where more than 80% of men are circumcised."
|
Between 2005 and 2006, three trials into the implications of circumcision on HIV transmission in Africa were cut short for ethical reasons. The researchers found that men who had been circumcised had a 76% (South Africa), 60% (Kenya), and 55% (Uganda) reduction in risk for HIV infection compared with those who were not circumcised
cont next post