@amberrmariee20 I dont think @twogirlsandagreen was trying to imply that if a man isnt circumcised he wont get erectile dysfunction. The linked article talks about a severely increased chance of developing it, it doesnt imply that a man can't still be unlucky and get it through other means.
I know ! But there's lots of factors that need to be put into what actually causes ED, the top 7 are in the link posted !
@amberrmariee20 The screen shot of that study you posted is about ADULT male circumcision, not the impact of infant circumcision, therefore completely irrelevant. And for the record, any grown man who decides to undergo circumcision has pretty much anyone's support, as it is their decision at that point. Babies can't choose for their parents to alter their bodies or leave their bodies alone.
And of course there are other factors, which is why in tact males can still get ED. Circumcised males are simply 4.5 times more likely to get it than in tact makes, all other factors being equal.
Gotcha ! I completely missed the fact the second article said adult circumsion ! While the rate for ED may be higher for circumsized males did they evaluate their psychical and mental health, check their risk factors, including smoking and drug use and put that into fact ? I just find with most studies that claim against or all for one thing they don't put enough evaluation in other factors as well. Just like smoking while pregnant increases the risk for asthma in babies. My mother smoked with me I have asthma. I never smoked when pregnant with my son, but he had asthma. Asthma is also genetic ... get what i mean ?
@amberrmeriee thanks for the link. I know my post might have implied largely on the whole ED caused by circumcision debate. But the other causes of ED alone are why some men can't take the go to medications to treat the condition, especially known in men that have a heart condition. Which would be more so my worry on the end of "What if my son was in his late 20's-30's and couldn't have a normal sex life." I mean ideally speaking no one expects their son to find someone they plan to spend their life with until about that time, so knowing my own husband's history, plus our family history with heart issues or need for medication that could cause ED it's probably going to be an issue at one time or another I feel like my own son's odds are at least decreased in one area if I don't go with circumcision.
There are still products in development that also treat circumcision caused ED, which actually stretch the skin back to more like it was when it was uncut(slowly over time). So for anyone that has real reasons to go with circumcision there isn't a reason they should be forced to believe it's something you will feel guilty about doing. Just as much as my son could get a circumcision when he's old enough to decide someone's son could choose a treatment that closely reverses circumcision.
@amberrmariee20 I dont think @twogirlsandagreen was trying to imply that if a man isnt circumcised he wont get erectile dysfunction. The linked article talks about a severely increased chance of developing it, it doesnt imply that a man can't still be unlucky and get it through other means.
I know ! But there's lots of factors that need to be put into what actually causes ED, the top 7 are in the link posted !
@amberrmariee20 The screen shot of that study you posted is about ADULT male circumcision, not the impact of infant circumcision, therefore completely irrelevant. And for the record, any grown man who decides to undergo circumcision has pretty much anyone's support, as it is their decision at that point. Babies can't choose for their parents to alter their bodies or leave their bodies alone.
And of course there are other factors, which is why in tact males can still get ED. Circumcised males are simply 4.5 times more likely to get it than in tact makes, all other factors being equal.
Gotcha ! I completely missed the fact the second article said adult circumsion ! While the rate for ED may be higher for circumsized males did they evaluate their psychical and mental health, check their risk factors, including smoking and drug use and put that into fact ? I just find with most studies that claim against or all for one thing they don't put enough evaluation in other factors as well. Just like smoking while pregnant increases the risk for asthma in babies. My mother smoked with me I have asthma. I never smoked when pregnant with my son, but he had asthma. Asthma is also genetic ... get what i mean ?
I do not know all of the variables they used - you are welcome to hunt down the actual study and read it to find out. And again, yes I agree that there are other factors like poor health and bad lifestyle choices, as well as genetics. I've never stated or implied that circumcision is the only cause of ED. 4,000 nerve endings are cut off during circumcision. That results in decreased nerve response. That results in a higher likelihood of that affecting a man's ability to maintain an erection as he ages. It is what it is, all other factors aside. In the U.S. three quarters of men with ED are circumcised.
The other problem is that there are not a ton of studies regarding circumcision because most of the world doesn't perform routine infant circumcision aside from religious reasons. Nor will the U.S. Health system be eager to encourage infant circumcision to become a procedure of the past. The doctors who perform the procedure like the easy income. Big pharma quite likes making astronomical amounts of money on Viagra and other ED meds for their highly circumcised US clientele. Look up the statistics for which country uses the most viagra...a country with a much higher circumcision rate than other countries.
I know that nothing I say or the other ladies say or link to will convince you not to circumcise this baby, and that is fine and totally your choice! We are trying to get information to those with an open mind still/in the research phase. I know that if I had circumcised my son and then learned all that I know now, I would be beyond devastated and feel huge guilt about it. At least if my son's foreskin becomes one of the rare cases to develop an issue, or if he chooses at 18 to undergo circumcision that he was not forced in to it. To me it is ethical, as well as medical since we are learning more and more every day about the important functions of the foreskin.
The article you linked to "5 common causes of impotence" was written by a nurse. No studies were cited whatsoever. While I totally agree that those ARE 5 common causes, there is no science provided to rank them and it is also not an inclusive list. Give it 10 years, and circumcision will be high on the list of common causes for ED. It isn't now because the medical community doesn't want to admit how wrong it was to ever push the procedure like it did.
We are highly evolved creatures and every single part of our bodies has a very unique and important purpose, including the foreskin, like it or not. Does that mean there will never be issues, no of course not! Some people have bad hearts, brains, gallbladders, appendices, foreskins, etc. I had to have my gallbladder removed because it functioned at 1% capacity without a single stone to blame. My family has a history of gallbladder issues. Does that mean I should go ahead and have my children's gallbladders removed to prevent them from suffering the debilitating awful attacks like I did? No way! Cross that bridge when we get there. If my son develops a serious issue with his foreskin, I have no issue with having it removed.
Statistically speaking, and I don't have the links handy at the moment, boys are more likely to suffer a circumcision-related issue (from adhesions all the way to death) than they are to suffer from recurrent infections, phimosis or any other foreskin related issue. The study compared the circ complication rate of the U.S. Since this is the only place that still performs it routinely vs the in tact population in Europe, since majority of males are in tact there.
I am a research buff, and I have access to journals that are not readily available online through grad school. I am very very very good at quickly being able to gauge a study's validity. Trust me, I prefer the look of a circumcised penis too, as that is what I have always been exposed to as the norm. But the look of a penis does nothing to ensure its health and proper function, as confirmed by RESEARCH of the true scientific kind, not opinion on the Internet. Yes lazy males who don't clean will be susceptible to infection. Pretty sure if us ladies didn't take 10 seconds to clean we would be too. Nothing at all wrong with teaching our boys proper hygiene and safe sex.
@amberrmeriee thanks for the link. I know my post might have implied largely on the whole ED caused by circumcision debate. But the other causes of ED alone are why some men can't take the go to medications to treat the condition, especially known in men that have a heart condition. Which would be more so my worry on the end of "What if my son was in his late 20's-30's and couldn't have a normal sex life." I mean ideally speaking no one expects their son to find someone they plan to spend their life with until about that time, so knowing my own husband's history, plus our family history with heart issues or need for medication that could cause ED it's probably going to be an issue at one time or another I feel like my own son's odds are at least decreased in one area if I don't go with circumcision.
There are still products in development that also treat circumcision caused ED, which actually stretch the skin back to more like it was when it was uncut(slowly over time). So for anyone that has real reasons to go with circumcision there isn't a reason they should be forced to believe it's something you will feel guilty about doing. Just as much as my son could get a circumcision when he's old enough to decide someone's son could choose a treatment that closely reverses circumcision.
Good points! One issue with the skin stretching procedure is that it doesn't actually regrow the nerve endings or the tiny muscles that were removed during circumcision. It does help to make the glans more sensitive again, as it gets desensitized from being exposed, so recovering it would help there. It also helps to reduce sexual friction for their female partners reducing micro vaginal tears. It is definitely an option to help males, but it won't be the same as the real deal.
@amberrmariee20 I dont think @twogirlsandagreen was trying to imply that if a man isnt circumcised he wont get erectile dysfunction. The linked article talks about a severely increased chance of developing it, it doesnt imply that a man can't still be unlucky and get it through other means.
I know ! But there's lots of factors that need to be put into what actually causes ED, the top 7 are in the link posted !
@amberrmariee20 The screen shot of that study you posted is about ADULT male circumcision, not the impact of infant circumcision, therefore completely irrelevant. And for the record, any grown man who decides to undergo circumcision has pretty much anyone's support, as it is their decision at that point. Babies can't choose for their parents to alter their bodies or leave their bodies alone.
And of course there are other factors, which is why in tact males can still get ED. Circumcised males are simply 4.5 times more likely to get it than in tact makes, all other factors being equal.
Gotcha ! I completely missed the fact the second article said adult circumsion ! While the rate for ED may be higher for circumsized males did they evaluate their psychical and mental health, check their risk factors, including smoking and drug use and put that into fact ? I just find with most studies that claim against or all for one thing they don't put enough evaluation in other factors as well. Just like smoking while pregnant increases the risk for asthma in babies. My mother smoked with me I have asthma. I never smoked when pregnant with my son, but he had asthma. Asthma is also genetic ... get what i mean ?
I do not know all of the variables they used - you are welcome to hunt down the actual study and read it to find out. And again, yes I agree that there are other factors like poor health and bad lifestyle choices, as well as genetics. I've never stated or implied that circumcision is the only cause of ED. 4,000 nerve endings are cut off during circumcision. That results in decreased nerve response. That results in a higher likelihood of that affecting a man's ability to maintain an erection as he ages. It is what it is, all other factors aside. In the U.S. three quarters of men with ED are circumcised.
The other problem is that there are not a ton of studies regarding circumcision because most of the world doesn't perform routine infant circumcision aside from religious reasons. Nor will the U.S. Health system be eager to encourage infant circumcision to become a procedure of the past. The doctors who perform the procedure like the easy income. Big pharma quite likes making astronomical amounts of money on Viagra and other ED meds for their highly circumcised US clientele. Look up the statistics for which country uses the most viagra...a country with a much higher circumcision rate than other countries.
I know that nothing I say or the other ladies say or link to will convince you not to circumcise this baby, and that is fine and totally your choice! We are trying to get information to those with an open mind still/in the research phase. I know that if I had circumcised my son and then learned all that I know now, I would be beyond devastated and feel huge guilt about it. At least if my son's foreskin becomes one of the rare cases to develop an issue, or if he chooses at 18 to undergo circumcision that he was not forced in to it. To me it is ethical, as well as medical since we are learning more and more every day about the important functions of the foreskin.
The article you linked to "5 common causes of impotence" was written by a nurse. No studies were cited whatsoever. While I totally agree that those ARE 5 common causes, there is no science provided to rank them and it is also not an inclusive list. Give it 10 years, and circumcision will be high on the list of common causes for ED. It isn't now because the medical community doesn't want to admit how wrong it was to ever push the procedure like it did.
We are highly evolved creatures and every single part of our bodies has a very unique and important purpose, including the foreskin, like it or not. Does that mean there will never be issues, no of course not! Some people have bad hearts, brains, gallbladders, appendices, foreskins, etc. I had to have my gallbladder removed because it functioned at 1% capacity without a single stone to blame. My family has a history of gallbladder issues. Does that mean I should go ahead and have my children's gallbladders removed to prevent them from suffering the debilitating awful attacks like I did? No way! Cross that bridge when we get there. If my son develops a serious issue with his foreskin, I have no issue with having it removed.
Statistically speaking, and I don't have the links handy at the moment, boys are more likely to suffer a circumcision-related issue (from adhesions all the way to death) than they are to suffer from recurrent infections, phimosis or any other foreskin related issue. The study compared the circ complication rate of the U.S. Since this is the only place that still performs it routinely vs the in tact population in Europe, since majority of males are in tact there.
I am a research buff, and I have access to journals that are not readily available online through grad school. I am very very very good at quickly being able to gauge a study's validity. Trust me, I prefer the look of a circumcised penis too, as that is what I have always been exposed to as the norm. But the look of a penis does nothing to ensure its health and proper function, as confirmed by RESEARCH of the true scientific kind, not opinion on the Internet. Yes lazy males who don't clean will be susceptible to infection. Pretty sure if us ladies didn't take 10 seconds to clean we would be too. Nothing at all wrong with teaching our boys proper hygiene and safe sex.
I definitely understand your points and read through the research. I agree there's definitely pros and cons to circumsion like there is with everything else ! There's research that supports both sides ! My first son wasn't circumsized due to having a surgery at 1 week old.
Please please please do NOT base your decision on an online group forum, biased articles, or uncited online research studies. Talk to your health care practitioner!!!
I know that some people's opinions are so strong, that you can emotionally feel their opinions in their write up. This can also cause sway.
My opinion on these discussions remind me of a growing 'parent vs health care trend' also seen in the anti-vaxer arguments.
With research studies, it's important to be thorough with clarifying facts. As you can basically very easily find a 'cited research study' out there that will support ANY side of ANY argument.
If you are planning on viewing an online video circumcision to see the pain that baby is through, please make sure it's a valid depiction of relevant western medical practice. There are so many that don't factually represent modern western medical practice. (Even though they say it is) Talk to a doctor who has seen/performed it first hand to get an idea of the pain scale.
The 'suggestive' reasons depicted online should not sway you. Circumcision aside; ask yourself what it is you want for your son, make a list. And then talk to medical professionals to determine what decision will assist you in providing that to your son. Remember, no matter what role you decide to take on (teaching him safe sex, proper hygiene etc...) that is no guarantee to determine the type of man that he'll grow up to be. No argument in this matter can be based on what you'll do during his young life, unless you're planning to be fully responsible for his penis for the rest of his life.
There is soooooo much intact propaganda out there that usually sways decision on scare tactic and falsities not medical fact.
Please talk to your doc. Take the proper steps of an informed decision starting there. This is a huge decision to make. Possible consequences/regret on either decision. And it is your first of many hard decisions that you'll be making on behalf of your son, don't leave that decision to the Internet.
Please please please do NOT base your decision on an online group forum, biased articles, or uncited online research studies. Talk to your health care practitioner!!!
I know that some people's opinions are so strong, that you can emotionally feel their opinions in their write up. This can also cause sway.
My opinion on these discussions remind me of a growing 'parent vs health care trend' also seen in the anti-vaxer arguments.
With research studies, it's important to be thorough with clarifying facts. As you can basically very easily find a 'cited research study' out there that will support ANY side of ANY argument.
If you are planning on viewing an online video circumcision to see the pain that baby is through, please make sure it's a valid depiction of relevant western medical practice. There are so many that don't factually represent modern western medical practice. (Even though they say it is) Talk to a doctor who has seen/performed it first hand to get an idea of the pain scale.
The 'suggestive' reasons depicted online should not sway you. Circumcision aside; ask yourself what it is you want for your son, make a list. And then talk to medical professionals to determine what decision will assist you in providing that to your son. Remember, no matter what role you decide to take on (teaching him safe sex, proper hygiene etc...) that is no guarantee to determine the type of man that he'll grow up to be. No argument in this matter can be based on what you'll do during his young life, unless you're planning to be fully responsible for his penis for the rest of his life.
There is soooooo much intact propaganda out there that usually sways decision on scare tactic and falsities not medical fact.
Please talk to your doc. Take the proper steps of an informed decision starting there. This is a huge decision to make. Possible consequences/regret on either decision. And it is your first of many hard decisions that you'll be making on behalf of your son, don't leave that decision to the Internet.
The problem is there is very little scientific evidence on either side at this point. Even still, there is no conclusive evidence to support medical reasons for routine infant circumcision. The only scientific based "pros" are a slightly decreased chance of HIV transmission (they should practice safe sex circumcised or not) and and a minor decrease in the chance of penile cancer. If women removed breasts as teenagers we would also be reducing the risk of breast cancer. They just are not compelling enough medical reasons to practice routine infant circumcision. The functions of foreskin have been studied, and we are still learning more and more about it. So weighing the scientific arguments (based solely on fact, not opinion or anecdotal evidence) for circumcision vs the scientific arguments for leaving infants in tact, the in tact evidence has the more compelling evidence.
The medical community in the U.S. is still not very well educated (at all) on the benefits of leaving foreskin, nor on the proper care of an in tact penis. If we could all consult with one American doctor and one European doctor on the matter, we would be getting much better information upon which to base decisions. But we don't, we only get the American doctor, most of whom are still on the pro-circ band wagon. They are not bad people, they just practice what they were taught. Our country has already gone in the direction of Europe in terms of circumcision rates falling drastically, and I suspect in a few generations it will only be done in babies/children for religious reasons or if a child is unfortunate and has some issue.
Also I never once ever linked to or cited any in tact propaganda cites. Most of the research I have done is based on European studies since the adult male in tact population is still rather small here. As the current generations of in tact children in the U.S. age, we will have more ability to study the effects of infant circumcision vs in tact more thoroughly.
A man can't regrow his foreskin. There are methods to stretch the skin to relieve tension and imitate the foreskin but it is not the same and from what I've read about the procedure it is not for the faint of heart.
And there are medical text still in circulation that make no mention of the foreskin. So consulting your doctor will probably get you an opinion based on their culturally biased interpretation of the research.
But none of that matters if you go the route of not altering a functional part of an infants body. You don't need evidence to support leaving your sons intact. There is as much risk to it as there is to leaving the rest of the body like it is and if a problem arises you treat it then.
A man can't regrow his foreskin. There are methods to stretch the skin to relieve tension and imitate the foreskin but it is not the same and from what I've read about the procedure it is not for the faint of heart.
And there are medical text still in circulation that make no mention of the foreskin. So consulting your doctor will probably get you an opinion based on their culturally biased interpretation of the research.
But none of that matters if you go the route of not altering a functional part of an infants body. You don't need evidence to support leaving your sons intact. There is as much risk to it as there is to leaving the rest of the body like it is and if a problem arises you treat it then.
Exactly. Doctors here are not even taught another way.
Every part on a human has a purpose. Every single one.
Re: To circumcise? Not to not ??? Thoughts??
Gotcha ! I completely missed the fact the second article said adult circumsion !
While the rate for ED may be higher for circumsized males did they evaluate their psychical and mental health, check their risk factors, including smoking and drug use and put that into fact ? I just find with most studies that claim against or all for one thing they don't put enough evaluation in other factors as well. Just like smoking while pregnant increases the risk for asthma in babies. My mother smoked with me I have asthma. I never smoked when pregnant with my son, but he had asthma. Asthma is also genetic ... get what i mean ?
The other problem is that there are not a ton of studies regarding circumcision because most of the world doesn't perform routine infant circumcision aside from religious reasons. Nor will the U.S. Health system be eager to encourage infant circumcision to become a procedure of the past. The doctors who perform the procedure like the easy income. Big pharma quite likes making astronomical amounts of money on Viagra and other ED meds for their highly circumcised US clientele. Look up the statistics for which country uses the most viagra...a country with a much higher circumcision rate than other countries.
I know that nothing I say or the other ladies say or link to will convince you not to circumcise this baby, and that is fine and totally your choice! We are trying to get information to those with an open mind still/in the research phase. I know that if I had circumcised my son and then learned all that I know now, I would be beyond devastated and feel huge guilt about it. At least if my son's foreskin becomes one of the rare cases to develop an issue, or if he chooses at 18 to undergo circumcision that he was not forced in to it. To me it is ethical, as well as medical since we are learning more and more every day about the important functions of the foreskin.
The article you linked to "5 common causes of impotence" was written by a nurse. No studies were cited whatsoever. While I totally agree that those ARE 5 common causes, there is no science provided to rank them and it is also not an inclusive list. Give it 10 years, and circumcision will be high on the list of common causes for ED. It isn't now because the medical community doesn't want to admit how wrong it was to ever push the procedure like it did.
We are highly evolved creatures and every single part of our bodies has a very unique and important purpose, including the foreskin, like it or not. Does that mean there will never be issues, no of course not! Some people have bad hearts, brains, gallbladders, appendices, foreskins, etc. I had to have my gallbladder removed because it functioned at 1% capacity without a single stone to blame. My family has a history of gallbladder issues. Does that mean I should go ahead and have my children's gallbladders removed to prevent them from suffering the debilitating awful attacks like I did? No way! Cross that bridge when we get there. If my son develops a serious issue with his foreskin, I have no issue with having it removed.
Statistically speaking, and I don't have the links handy at the moment, boys are more likely to suffer a circumcision-related issue (from adhesions all the way to death) than they are to suffer from recurrent infections, phimosis or any other foreskin related issue. The study compared the circ complication rate of the U.S. Since this is the only place that still performs it routinely vs the in tact population in Europe, since majority of males are in tact there.
I am a research buff, and I have access to journals that are not readily available online through grad school. I am very very very good at quickly being able to gauge a study's validity. Trust me, I prefer the look of a circumcised penis too, as that is what I have always been exposed to as the norm. But the look of a penis does nothing to ensure its health and proper function, as confirmed by RESEARCH of the true scientific kind, not opinion on the Internet. Yes lazy males who don't clean will be susceptible to infection. Pretty sure if us ladies didn't take 10 seconds to clean we would be too. Nothing at all wrong with teaching our boys proper hygiene and safe sex.
Please please please do NOT base your decision on an online group forum, biased articles, or uncited online research studies. Talk to your health care practitioner!!!
I know that some people's opinions are so strong, that you can emotionally feel their opinions in their write up. This can also cause sway.
My opinion on these discussions remind me of a growing 'parent vs health care trend' also seen in the anti-vaxer arguments.
With research studies, it's important to be thorough with clarifying facts. As you can basically very easily find a 'cited research study' out there that will support ANY side of ANY argument.
If you are planning on viewing an online video circumcision to see the pain that baby is through, please make sure it's a valid depiction of relevant western medical practice. There are so many that don't factually represent modern western medical practice. (Even though they say it is)
Talk to a doctor who has seen/performed it first hand to get an idea of the pain scale.
The 'suggestive' reasons depicted online should not sway you.
Circumcision aside; ask yourself what it is you want for your son, make a list. And then talk to medical professionals to determine what decision will assist you in providing that to your son.
Remember, no matter what role you decide to take on (teaching him safe sex, proper hygiene etc...) that is no guarantee to determine the type of man that he'll grow up to be. No argument in this matter can be based on what you'll do during his young life, unless you're planning to be fully responsible for his penis for the rest of his life.
There is soooooo much intact propaganda out there that usually sways decision on scare tactic and falsities not medical fact.
Please talk to your doc. Take the proper steps of an informed decision starting there.
This is a huge decision to make. Possible consequences/regret on either decision. And it is your first of many hard decisions that you'll be making on behalf of your son, don't leave that decision to the Internet.
The medical community in the U.S. is still not very well educated (at all) on the benefits of leaving foreskin, nor on the proper care of an in tact penis. If we could all consult with one American doctor and one European doctor on the matter, we would be getting much better information upon which to base decisions. But we don't, we only get the American doctor, most of whom are still on the pro-circ band wagon. They are not bad people, they just practice what they were taught. Our country has already gone in the direction of Europe in terms of circumcision rates falling drastically, and I suspect in a few generations it will only be done in babies/children for religious reasons or if a child is unfortunate and has some issue.
Also I never once ever linked to or cited any in tact propaganda cites. Most of the research I have done is based on European studies since the adult male in tact population is still rather small here. As the current generations of in tact children in the U.S. age, we will have more ability to study the effects of infant circumcision vs in tact more thoroughly.
And there are medical text still in circulation that make no mention of the foreskin. So consulting your doctor will probably get you an opinion based on their culturally biased interpretation of the research.
But none of that matters if you go the route of not altering a functional part of an infants body. You don't need evidence to support leaving your sons intact. There is as much risk to it as there is to leaving the rest of the body like it is and if a problem arises you treat it then.
Every part on a human has a purpose. Every single one.