Controversial circumcision ritual led to infant's death from herpes, says death certificate

[IDFbunny]

[link:http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57392437-10391704/controversial-circumcision-ritual-led-to-infants-death-from-herpes-says-death-certificate/|

Circumcisions are tied to health benefits, however.

Men who have been circumcised have a lower risk for infection with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, according to the CDC, and the procedure seems to offer some protection against genital ulcer, Chlamydia, and penile cancer.

Perhaps. But infants are not men. Can somebody make a case on why a child cannot wait until adulthood or at the very least until they can take anesthetics and can resist infection? It is straight up genital mutilation.

[bemildred]

1. The easiest way to avoid STDs is to avoid casual sex with multiple partners.

Genuine monogamy offers excellent protection from all STDs.

Getting circumcised to obtain some modest protection seems indirect, at best. I suppose if one plans to have lots of casual sex it might make some sense, "managing the risk" so to speak, like wearing condoms.

It has always seemed to me that if the uncircumcised penis was very harmful, evolution would have weeded it out. I would guess that the prepuce is there to offer the head of your dick some small protection. This does seem less important in a culture that wears clothes all the time.

I think the routine circumcising of male children is all about the money.

[IDFbunny]

2. its about as much as superstition to

Insomuch as there might be a slight health benefit it only goes to sexually active adults.