General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: CDC: Circumcision Benefits Outweigh Risks [View all]FunkyLeprechaun
(2,383 posts)is not child abuse?
And you believe the African studies?
I guess when I write a research paper using diet pills, I will divide the volunteers into two groups: one not taking the diet pills and one taking the diet pills. I send the people not taking the diet pills on their merry way and give the people who are taking the pills a free gym membership, a nutritionist, and a check up on their weight once a month. 3 months later, the volunteers who didn't take the diet pills gained a lot of weight and the volunteers who took the diet pills lost a lot of weight. I could conclude that the diet pills worked 60% of the time.
This kind of scenario exactly happened with the Africa study- some of the uncircumcised males got HIV because they didn't get the same kind of controls as the circumcised men did, which was waiting 4-6 weeks to have sex, getting sexual education and regular STD testing and the researchers who did the study concluded, even with the results being incredibly flawed, that circumcision reduced HIV 60% of the time. The CDC, alongside other American medical organisations, is essentially using an incredibly flawed study to prop up circumcision either because of cultural bias or financial incentive as there is a billion dollar industry in the US using infant foreskin- including companies that make facial creams that consist of material from infant foreskin or using foreskin to help regrow skin for burn victims.