Strollerderby

They Say: Circumcision Tied to Lower Rates of STDs

Posted by Kate Tuttle

A new study seems to confirm earlier findings that circumcision may offer men protection against some sexually transmitted diseases. The research is far from clear, though, and will likely not clear up any of the confusion facing parents deciding whether or not to circumcize their newborn sons (once performed at rates approaching 90% in the United States, routine infant circumsicion is hitting all-time lows, with something like half of all boys born in the Western US avoiding the procedure). 

The study, published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine, did not look at infant circumcision in the United States. Doctors followed a group of 3,000 uncircumcized Ugandan men, none of whom were infected with herpes (specifically HSV2, the strain that causes genital lesions). Half were immediately circumsized, while men in the other group underwent the procedure two years later. At the end of the survey, according to the New York Times, "the researchers estimated that circumcised men had a 25 percent reduced risk of infection." A smaller subgroup was also evaluated for HPV, the human papilloma virus that causes genital warts and is a leading cause of cervical cancer in women. In that group, the risk for circumsized men was calculated to be 35% lower.

Critics will doubtless point out that studies of adult men in Africa may not signify equivalent results when looking at children born and raised in the United States. And the trend for the past decade or so has seen a rise in advocacy groups who argue that the procedure is an unnecessary surgery that may be harmful to a baby boy's future sexual life. Partly as a result of this movement, fewer doctors push for the procedure, and now Medicaid does not cover it in 16 states. If studies like this do turn out to apply across the board, then perhaps that pendulum will swing the other way. For parents expecting a baby boy, the decision will always be a tough one; here's hoping that some scientific consensus will emerge to help guide the way. 

 

More by this author:

Late-Term Abortion Provider on Trial in Kansas

Boomer Grandmothers: Out Of Control?

Move Over, Booties! Here Come Knitted Boobies

Think Your Baby's Car Seat Is Safe? Think Again

Parents Forgo Circumcision to Save Money

 

 


+ DIGG + STUMBLE

Comments

 

theclevermom said:

I know a surefire way of reducing your son's chances of acquiring an STD to almost NIL: teach him how and why to use condoms, teach him how to respect himself and teach him how to respect others.

And you don't have to amputate an important, nerve rich component of his genitals to do it!

March 28, 2009 12:43 AM
 

dei said:

I live in the UK, where circumcision isn't performed. To be honest, even if chopping off a bit of my baby prevented some diseases, there are better ways of preventing them - condom use, responsibility, screening. Cutting his hands off would stop him sticking his fingers in the sockets, but hey, so will those little plastic doohickies.

March 28, 2009 12:59 PM
 

someones mom said:

Not all sti's can be prevented with condom use. And circumcisions are performed in the UK- just not routinely. That said, I'd not rush to circumcise a baby boy for potential health benefits. This bears watching, either way.

March 28, 2009 7:46 PM
 

Comment maker said:

My husband is circumcised and his sex life is just fine.

March 28, 2009 11:21 PM
 

SeekingJoy said:

One could drive a 18-wheeler through the methodology problems in this study. Why report on crappy "science"?

March 29, 2009 12:56 PM
 

Anonymous said:

Alright, how exactly, does one get an STD again? Through sexual interaction with those INFECTED. It's a no-brainer as to how you prevent that; avoid them, and educate. It's your own damned fault if you get an STD when you should know better. Behavior is the TRUE risk factor, not a piece of PROPER (Since it's omitted from consideration even in US textbooks) human anatomy. An amputation isn't going to stop anyone from irresponsible and reckless behavior. The surgery would have an effect ultimately akin to a 'condom' (Not really) that breaks about 50% of the time. As for how they speak of how ideal that 'warm, moist, dark' cover is for infections to thrive in the study... *Facepalm* So is a girls genitalia, honestly. Why is the MALE foreskin looked at as being so unique and exceptional to the rule? The EXACT same thing could be said of a woman's dark labial folds and even the vaginal canal. They're prone to yeast for a reason. Yet nooone wants to 'fix' THAT. Wonder why.

April 9, 2009 10:14 AM

About Kate Tuttle

I'm raising a toddler and a teenager in a leafy suburb just outside Boston. In between having kids I've been an editor and writer, most recently with the African American National Biography and the late great Africana.com.

in

GROUP BLOGS

  • Strollerderby

    The smartest, funniest, most exhaustive parenting blog in the blogosphere.
  • Droolicious

    Modern design for modern parents.
  • FameCrawler

    Your daily baby celebrity fix.
back to blog homepage