34 Comments

Women health and Male circumcision


Male circumcision is one of the most hotly debated sexual health issues in the medical community, and it’s also widely discussed among everyday men and women. Why it is such a controversial topic? Well, part of the reason might be because there’s no definitive evidence that being circumcised is better, medically speaking, than being uncircumcised – and vice versa.

However, there are certain things that we are sure of when it comes to circumcision, which involves a minor surgical procedure to remove the foreskin (the sleeve of skin around the head of the penis). These factors offer compelling reasons for men to get the snip.

Here are some of the advantages of circumcisions:

Circumcision does not affect male sexual drive or functioning.
When a guy is not circumcised, moisture can get trapped between his penis and the foreskin, which creates an ideal environment for bacteria to grow. This means there’s a higher risk of infection and it’s easier to spread viruses to others.
Removing the foreskin gets rid of the wet, warm and dark environment that can sustain viruses such as HIV and other sexually transmitted infections such as syphilis, herpes and cancroids.
Being circumcised reduces your female partner’s risk of cervical cancer.
By getting circumcised, you not only reduce your own HIV and STI risk, but your partner’s too.
It can be difficult to keep an uncircumcised penis fresh 100% of the time. Circumcision simplifies the task of keeping the penis clean and keeps you fresher, giving you more confidence.
Some women prefer circumcised penises due to personal preference, as well as the reasons listed here.
The procedure: What to expect and recovery time
A medical male circumcision takes about 30 minutes and is done under anaesthetic by a doctor. The foreskin is snipped off and a few stitches are used to close the incision. These fall out on their own once the penis has healed.

Afterwards you may experience some discomfort for a day or two, but generally it isn’t very painful. There should be no more swelling after two to three weeks, and complete recovery in adult men takes around four to six weeks.

For many years, men have been the direct recipients of messages on medical male circumcision and its benefits. One of them being that it reduces the risk of HIV infection in men. Now women are being made aware that having a circumcised partner does not only protect him, but also protects the woman from getting the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV), which ultimately leads to cancer. Cindra Feuer from AVAC, the Global Advocacy for HIV Prevention, explains.

‘A man who is circumcised… he’s less likely to transmit HPV, he’s less likely to transmit herpes and other sexually transmitted infections. There is data that shows that it reduces transmission of HPV from men to women – and other STI’s. HPV causes cervical cancer and also causes penile cancer in men. The reason why it is protective is because when a man has a foreskin, there are cells in the foreskin that attract HIV, so they are more vulnerable to HIV than if there was no foreskin. And, also, it’s a warm place… bacteria can grow more says Cindra Feuer, form the AVAC Global Advocacy for HIV Prevention.

A random study done in Uganda between 2003 and 2006 sought to investigate whether an HIV negative circumcised man can reduce the chances of his HIV-negative female partner from contracting HPV. After 24 months, the study found that more than 38% of women whose partners were uncircumcised had high risk HPV infection compared to 27.8% of women whose partners were circumcised.

From the study’s findings it is now recommended that medical male circumcision should be accepted as an effective intervention for reducing the prevalence and incidence of HPV infection in women. But many women are not aware that medical male circumcision is beneficial for them, as evidenced by these two women I met.

‘This is new information to me and I believe it’s good now that I know. And other women should, too. Many times they tell us about HIV and never inform us about cancer – and cervical cancer is very serious. I will encourage women to talk to their partners because cancer is a slow killer. It is worse than HIV, so women need to know this for their own life and health as well.

‘I wasn’t aware. I always thought since it is about the guy, it only benefits them. I really didn’t know. This is something I have never thought about the women said.

It would seem there is a lack of information out there for women about the benefits of medical male circumcision. Dr Dimakatso Lebina of Zuzimpilo Medical Centre in downtown Jo’burg, says there are small, but steady efforts to make this information available.

‘Now there is a shift towards that change because we know, as healthcare professionals, women utilise the services more than men. And unless the women were not informed of these benefits, we would not have as many men as we are having now to request the services. Some men are brought by their partners who have read about these benefits’, she says.

Advertisements

34 comments on “Women health and Male circumcision

  1. Nice post

    On Tue, 27 Mar 2018, 21:20 Shake Your Conscience !, wrote:

    > Imran Ali posted: ” Male circumcision is one of the most hotly debated > sexual health issues in the medical community, and it’s also widely > discussed among everyday men and women. Why it is such a controversial > topic? Well, part of the reason might be because there’s no d” >

    Liked by 2 people

  2. SMiLes.. my FriEnd..
    Nice to see you back
    Blogging.. Imran..:)

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I think it is a good decision for the parents to have their male baby circumcised . Circumcism in a grown man is painful and has higher risk of infection. On a side note, the blanket statement that HPV ultimately results in cancer is not true. In most cases the virus remains dormant but annual Pap tests are always recommended . Thanks for addressing this issue.

    Liked by 6 people

  4. But I wonder how painful it is for those who go through non medical circumcision.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. It’s really a good topic to debate on…

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Imran Ali I do not know what you do. But just about everything you write is wrong. There will be many words if I answered all the wrong facts in your article. Look up doctors oppositing circumsison and you will be informed about today’s scientific knowledge of the foreskin and circumcision.The study in Uganda also showed that women to circumcised men were more easily infected with HIV than if their men were intact.
    HPV virus is also found in circumcised men. The women who have been infected have most often had intercourse with men who have had unprotected intercourse with many women. The condom protects significantly safer against both HIV and HPV than circumcision possibly protects. You should probate for condom and safe sex instead of genital mutilation of little boys. / Mats Birgersson I am a child intensive care nurse.

    Liked by 1 person

    • The warm, moist space under the foreskin is a prime breeding ground for bacteria, it can harbor sexually transmitted disease organisms, and it produces a cheese-like, foul-smelling substance called smegma. It is plausible that this could contribute to infections in the man and his partner, and even to cancer. Many studies support that idea, others don’t. There doesn’t seem to be any good evidence comparing circumcised men to uncircumcised men who practice meticulous hygiene. It’s difficult to sort out whether it is the circumcision itself or just improved hygiene that makes the difference. Circumcision undoubtedly facilitates hygiene,

      Liked by 1 person

    • SHARE THIS:

      inShare
      1Save

      Share on Tumblr

      More
      Some people think circumcision is mutilation; others want one even if they don’t know what it is. When I was working in an Air Force hospital emergency room one night, a young airman came in requesting a circumcision. I asked him why he wanted one. He said a couple of his friends had had it done, and he’d heard it was a good idea, and he was going to be getting out of the Air Force pretty soon and wanted to have it done while Uncle Sam would still foot the bill. I examined him: he had a neatly circumcised penis without so much as a hint of any foreskin remnant. I’ve always wondered what he thought we were going to cut off.

      The subject of circumcision evokes strong emotions. Some people think of neonatal circumcision as a religious duty or a valuable preventive health measure; others think it is the epitome of child abuse. I have no strong feelings either way. I’m not sure what I would have decided if I’d had sons; fortunately my children were both daughters so I didn’t have to decide. I’m going to try to stand back and look at the scientific evidence objectively. What are the medical benefits and risks of circumcision?

      There is a website that is admittedly biased in favor of circumcision but that has collected an impressive amount of information in one place, with 660 references. I learned way too much from that website. For instance that the circumcised penis averages 0.8 cm shorter than the uncircumcised penis (possibly due to improper technique occasionally removing too much tissue and “tethering” the organ slightly). And that an intact foreskin is an absolute requirement for a mutual masturbation practice amongst homosexual men known as “docking,” in which the penis is placed under the foreskin of the male partner. I didn’t need to know that. You probably didn’t want to know that either, but now it’s too late.

      In addition to pro-circumcision groups like Circinfo.net, there are numerous anti-circumcision activist groups. There are even groups that encourage re-creation of the lost foreskin by stretching the penile skin with specially-designed weights. Penn and Teller featured this on an episode of their cable TV series Bullshit! An elderly man exposed his genitals – weights and all – on national television to promote his cause. It was pretty amazing. A somewhat blurred version can be seen on U-Tube.

      Arguments against circumcision
      “Nature makes no mistakes.”
      It’s genital mutilation and a violation of human rights.
      Doctors just do it to earn more money.
      It’s cruel; babies suffer terrible pain.
      Babies remember the pain.
      There are permanent physiologic consequences: boys who were circumcised at birth are more sensitive to pain later in life.
      The uncovered glans becomes less sensitive.
      Circumcised men don’t get as much pleasure from sex.
      Circumcised men are psychologically damaged.
      Some men mourn their lost foreskin; some miss it so much that they try to reconstruct it.
      The foreskin is required for the homosexual practice of “docking.”
      An intact foreskin provides more scope for body art like piercings and tattoos.
      There are complications from the surgery including hemorrhage, infection and even death (in one famous case a boy’s penis was accidently burned off by an electrocautery device and they elected to raise him as a girl).
      Other complications include poor cosmetic results and meatal stenosis.
      If reconstructive surgery is needed later in life, an intact foreskin can provide tissue.
      It’s elective surgery and the patient doesn’t get a choice in the matter.
      Some of these arguments are medical; some are not. Some are questionable. The “doctors want to make money” argument doesn’t seem to hold water, since plenty of circumcisions are done in settings where doctors are on a fixed salary and circumcisions just mean more work.

      There’s no good evidence that circumcised men get less pleasure from sex. Studies have shown little or no difference in sensitivity or sexual satisfaction with circumcision. If there were lowered sensitivity it might theoretically enhance pleasure by allowing more prolonged intercourse; and one man commented, “most [circumcised] men will tell you that if their genitalia were any more sensitive, it would cry during Meryl Streep movies.”

      If some men are psychologically damaged by circumcision and mourn their lost foreskin, their mental health must be pathologically fragile. Get over it, guys!

      I don’t think there is any evidence that babies are capable of remembering the pain of circumcision or for that matter the birth experience. There have been studies suggesting that infant circumcision alters pain response later in life, but they are contradictory and unconvincing.

      The risks are minimal if the procedure is done under sterile conditions by an experienced operator. Many of the serious complications documented in the literature were easily preventable. “Overall complications should approach zero for an experienced operator” especially if the safer techniques are used and contraindications like hemophilia and penile abnormalities are heeded.

      A colleague told me he challenges his students to find any difference in babies who just had the procedure, and they can’t. Babies seem to get just as upset from lesser procedures like having blood drawn, and sometimes an irritable baby goes into a hissy fit just from being dressed or from being hungry. They cry uncontrollably for even trivial reasons, but they get over it promptly.

      I used to do assembly-line circumcisions where we’d strap several babies to molded plastic restraining boards; they didn’t like being restrained, but by the time the last baby was restrained, the first one would usually have stopped crying and would often remain calm throughout the actual procedure, especially if he’d been given a sugar pacifier. Sometimes he’d even go to sleep. I used a Plastibell device: the actual cutting part of the procedure is painless even without anesthesia, because the tissue is already “dead” – the blood supply has been cut off by tying a string over the groove in the plastic ring. Studies have documented physiologic changes during the procedure, but it’s not clear that those changes mean anything that really matters to the child’s mental state or physical welfare. It’s current practice to inject an anesthetic, but that carries its own small risk and also causes pain: it’s not 100% clear whether we’re using it for the infant’s benefit or the adults’. Some doctors still wonder if it might be kinder to skip the anesthesia and just get the procedure over with and the baby back in Mom’s arms as quickly as possible.

      Arguments for circumcision
      Some of the arguments for circumcision are unavoidably intertwined with a separate issue: hygiene. The warm, moist space under the foreskin is a prime breeding ground for bacteria, it can harbor sexually transmitted disease organisms, and it produces a cheese-like, foul-smelling substance called smegma. It is plausible that this could contribute to infections in the man and his partner, and even to cancer. Many studies support that idea, others don’t. There doesn’t seem to be any good evidence comparing circumcised men to uncircumcised men who practice meticulous hygiene. It’s difficult to sort out whether it is the circumcision itself or just improved hygiene that makes the difference. Circumcision undoubtedly facilitates hygiene, but is that a reason to operate?

      Circumcision reduces the transmission of AIDS. Maybe. A 2008 meta-analysis of studies in Africa indicated that one case of heterosexually transmitted AIDS would be prevented by 72 circumcisions. It seems to be less effective at preventing male-to-male homosexual transmission. This gets confusing, because knowing they have had a risk-reducing procedure might increase promiscuity, and improved hygiene alone might reduce risk. Anyway, circumcision doesn’t remove the risk entirely, and safe sex is still necessary. Since there are other more effective ways to prevent AIDS transmission, few would argue for circumcision just for the purpose of AIDS prevention.
      Circumcision prevents penile cancer. The incidence of penile cancer is about 1 in 100,000 in the US. By one estimate, the lifetime risk for an uncircumcised man in the US is 1 in 600. The 5 year survival rate is about 65%. Penile cancer is almost never seen in circumcised men; such a case is unusual enough to be written up as a case report in a medical journal. In third world countries where hygiene is poorer and circumcision is less common, penile cancer causes up to 10% or 20% of cancers in men. Disgusting photos can be seen at http://www.circinfo.net/cancer_of_the_penis.html
      The American Cancer Society thinks the studies showing reduced penile cancer rates were flawed because they failed to consider other factors that are now known to affect risk, such as smoking, personal hygiene, HPV infection, and multiple sexual partners. It concluded:
      The current consensus of most experts is that circumcision should not be recommended as a prevention strategy for penile cancer.

      Reduced risk of urinary tract infection. Several studies have shown that circumcised baby boys have fewer UTIs but the reduction is small and this study suggests confounding factors might be responsible.
      Reduced risk of balanitis (inflammation of the glans penis). Most studies show balanitis is more common in uncircumcised males, but at least one study indicated that it was more common in circumcised males, especially in early childhood.
      Reduction of the incidence of various sexually transmitted diseases in men and in their female partners. Reduction of cervical cancer and maybe even breast cancer in women. Again, these are likely more related to hygiene than to surgery.
      Circumcision prevents phimosis (the inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (a painful inability to pull the retracted foreskin back down). Paraphimosis can obstruct urine and blood flow and is a medical emergency.
      About 10% of uncircumcised infants will require circumcision later in life for medical reasons. Adult circumcision is more expensive, more difficult, riskier, requires stitches, and causes more suffering than neonatal circumcision. The conditions that lead to the medical necessity for circumcision also cause suffering that would have been avoided by neonatal circumcision.
      Hygiene. It’s easier to keep a circumcised penis clean. Certainly it’s a convenience, but that doesn’t constitute a medical indication.
      Aesthetics. Women allegedly prefer the appearance of a circumcised penis. Even if true, not a medical indication.
      Zipper injuries to the foreskin can’t occur if you don’t have a foreskin. True, but trivial.
      Other boys will laugh at you in the locker room if you’re uncircumcised. (I don’t think this one even deserves a comment

      Like

  7. Hi Imran, I looked at “about ” you and understand that you have studied a lot and then you should understand current facts about the foreskin and circumcision. So before writing about these things study facts, more carefully. You can in addition to doctors opposing circumcision look at CIRP WWW, cirp.org / library / or Circumcision Information Australia, circinfo.org and http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/foreskin-why-it-such-secret-north-america . In that article there are many links to the informaton about the foreskin and circumcision. And Jews against circumcision and muslims against child circumcision / Mats Birgersson

    Like

    • Circumcision prevents penile cancer. The incidence of penile cancer is about 1 in 100,000 in the US. By one estimate, the lifetime risk for an uncircumcised man in the US is 1 in 600. The 5 year survival rate is about 65%. Penile cancer is almost never seen in circumcised men; such a case is unusual enough to be written up as a case report in a medical journal. In third world countries where hygiene is poorer and circumcision is less common, penile cancer causes up to 10% or 20% of cancers in men. Disgusting photos can be seen at http://www.circinfo.net/cancer_of_the_penis.html
      The American Cancer Society thinks the studies showing reduced penile cancer rates were flawed because they failed to consider other factors that are now known to affect risk, such as smoking, personal hygiene, HPV infection, and multiple sexual partners.

      Like

  8. Imran, great information. Thank you for sharing this post. I’ll certainly reblog this post So our user can read them and can understand.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. It’s better during childhood for male circumcision.. at least that’s my belief..great post

    Liked by 3 people

  10. If I may say frankly, a circumcised man is more desirable–at least, *I* prefer that. 🙂

    It may sound very subjective, well of course it is. In my young days, I did things I’m NOT proud of. Like, shared bed with some men just to relieve my stress. Not many, but enough to understand that uncircumcised man made my genital very itchy afterwards. I didn’t enjoy the (extra) smell either. I mean, I’m very clean when it comes to private area. So, to have met such man was absolutely uncomfortable for me.

    Anyways, excellent post, my friend. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  11. Prophet Hazrat Ibrahim was the first to circumcise himself at the age of 80 years and others followed him.
    Imran Ali correct me please. I read in a book Fazail e Emaan

    Liked by 2 people

  12. When the heart is at ease, the body is healthy

    Liked by 2 people

  13. This was worth reading…!

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Thank u for dropping by my blog😇🤗🤗🤗

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: