General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Studies showing "benefits of circumcision" highly flawed [View all]JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)These people are not in this thread to discuss the data or the arguments. They will take one tiny bit, deliberately misunderstand it, use the standard buzzwords of modern pseudo-skeptical sophistry, and make sure to always stick an attack headline on it (figuring a lot of people read about as much as they do). Like, where is the admission that Earp mainly does an exposition of studies by medical doctors? Good luck. Repeat 30,000 times. I engage it because it kicks the thread, and hopefully more people read the OP.
EVERYONE! If you're in this thread, please make sure you read the OP, Earp's column, and the studies he cites, and my own analysis of Auvert (linked in OP). Read the Auvert study and the pro-"circumcision" propaganda, also. Thank you.