+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 152
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,712
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    7,295
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts

    Default American Academy of Paediatrics backs circumcision

    Penile cancer rate is less than 1 in every 100,000 men in USA and Europe. Interesting, since rates are very low in USA where circumcision is the norm, and also low in Europe where circumcision is not the norm.

    And is anybody able to explain why America's HIV rate is so high compared to other western countries where circumcision rates are much, much lower.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BigRedV For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (30-08-2012),Ellewood  (30-08-2012),sockstealingpoltergeist  (31-08-2012),VicPark  (30-08-2012)

  3. #82
    Busy-Bee's Avatar
    Busy-Bee is offline Offending people since before Del :D
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    11,185
    Thanks
    3,665
    Thanked
    4,705
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Past Moderator - Thank you
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialPatrolGroup View Post
    I have a real problem with the *reduced risk of STI* part of the argument.
    I agree. If the only thing that's stopping an STI being transferred is the lack of a foreskin then I think there are bigger issues at play. Condoms anyone?? No surgical procedure required.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Busy-Bee For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (30-08-2012),Witwicky  (30-08-2012)

  5. #83
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    88
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked
    28
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    doctors are quite happy to do the procedure as they are aware of the benefits.
    This is not true at all....!

  6. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts

    Default American Academy of Paediatrics backs circumcision

    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    I assume you are only considering STIs here? Phimosis, UTIs, balanitis, penile cancer, etc. You have to weigh up ALL the benefits. This is what the AAP has done in their risk/benefit analysis. It is not just STIs.
    Phimosis is quite rare and is a condition where medically necessary circ would be appropriate, no one disputes that.
    UTIs however are generally a hygiene issue.
    Penile cancer- not convinced, it's soooo rare as it it is, not really a good enough reason to chop.
    Even balanitis comes down to hygiene and happens to circed boys too so again, not a good reason to circ. if the AAP recommended all boys be circed as a result of their research it might carry more weight, but they do not.

    Basically they are saying if done properly the risks are smaller than the benefits however the benefits are not great enough that we recommend this procedure as standard.
    Last edited by Atropos; 30-08-2012 at 08:00.

  7. #85
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Baracuda View Post
    This is not true at all....!
    Have you actually tried to find a doctor to circumcised your boys?
    If you haven't, then you probably are not in the best position to know how easy it is to find a doctor.

    Both my boys were circumcised. A couple of phone calls, and a booking was made on both occasions. We met no opposition, including the hospital, who happily gave us a list of doctors and their phone numbers.

  8. #86
    Witwicky's Avatar
    Witwicky is offline A closed mouth gathers no foot.
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    5,630
    Thanks
    4,446
    Thanked
    3,495
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts

    Default American Academy of Paediatrics backs circumcision

    I went to two different birthing classes and we were all advised not to circ at both of them. One couple still wished to circ their newborn and the educator told them the name of the *only* physician in the city who performed the procedure. My own midwife said that very few get it done anymore, but if they choose to, she is obligated to provide details of a physician who performs the procedure.

    I wouldn't say it was difficult if you DO want to get it done, however it's certainly not as easy as it was a generation ago (My own father was circumcised while still in hospital).

    However, the info provided by medical professionals at birth classes coupled with the number of doctors who actually perform it, kind of says something. I know a few couples who changed their minds based on that alone.

  9. #87
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    45
    Thanks
    17
    Thanked
    9
    Reviews
    0
    I tend to keep out of these threads but I just came across this article that I found interesting. Haven't read through anyone's posts so not sure if it's already been posted, so apologies in advance if it has.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48798567.../#.UD7i_9YgeDP

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Enyala For This Useful Post:

    Sonja  (30-08-2012)

  11. #88
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    88
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked
    28
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    Have you actually tried to find a doctor to circumcised your boys?
    If you haven't, then you probably are not in the best position to know how easy it is to find a doctor.

    Both my boys were circumcised. A couple of phone calls, and a booking was made on both occasions. We met no opposition, including the hospital, who happily gave us a list of doctors and their phone numbers.
    Your statement was 'doctors are quite happy to perform the procedure'....

    This isn't true. Very few doctors are willing to perform circumcisions. You were given a list of doctors to contact, but that would have been a short list.

    Ive read through the thread and you don't seem to be following any logic in your thought process, just desperately trying to justify your pro-circ stance! But you're dismissing excellent and valid points made by other posters, because you don't want to discuss it and accept other's point of views you just want to be 'right'.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Baracuda For This Useful Post:

    Ellewood  (30-08-2012),Witwicky  (30-08-2012)

  13. #89
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked
    808
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I should probably try to provide some background to this widely anticipated move by the AAP.

    In 2007 the CDC held a consultation on HIV at which a powerful faction pushed the argument that "poor blacks", who have disproportionately high infection rates, are being discouraged from RIC because of lack of Medicaid coverage in many states. Blacks already have a high circ prevalence (73%), and it is unclear how further increasing RIC will have any effect on HIV rates. Indeed, the entire evidentiary basis is a single STI clinic study from Baltimore which purported to show that among heterosexual African Americans whose partners are already HIV positive, there was a correlation between circumcision and lower rates of infection.

    AAP representatives attended this consultation and were basically told to alter their policy so States would reverse their decisions to drop Medicaid coverage. They couldn't tell pediatricians to recommend RIC, since HIV is irrelevant to the health of children, who are of course the patients (whatever parents may think), but they wanted something to give the CDC political leverage in the health insurance debate. It took the AAP five years to square this circle and come up with the current dog's breakfast.

    In itself, the policy "change" will make little difference. It's actually ob/gyns who perform most of the 1.2 million US circs. And you'd have to be a true believer to think that this will have any effect on HIV levels of US blacks anytime, ever.

    But as they say, only in America ...
    Last edited by JohnC; 30-08-2012 at 16:24. Reason: typos

  14. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to JohnC For This Useful Post:

    Busy-Bee  (30-08-2012),Ceili  (01-09-2012),Ellewood  (30-08-2012),sockstealingpoltergeist  (31-08-2012),Sonja  (30-08-2012),Witwicky  (30-08-2012)

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    12,714
    Thanks
    9,561
    Thanked
    12,691
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 9/1/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 7/11/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 3/10/14100 Posts in a week

    Default American Academy of Paediatrics backs circumcision

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnC View Post
    I should probably try to provide some background to this widely anticipated move by the AAP.

    In 2007 the CDC held a consultation on HIV at which a powerful faction pushed the argument that "poor blacks", who have disproportionately high infection rates, are being discouraged from RIC because of lack of Medicaid coverage in many states. Blacks already have a high circ prevalence (73%), and it is unclear how further increasing RIC will have any effect on HIV rates. Indeed, the entire evidentiary basis is a single STI clinic study from Baltimore which purported to show that among heterosexual African Americans whose partners are already HIV positive, there was a correlation between circumcision and lower rates of infection.

    AAP representatives attended this consultation and were basically told to alter their policy so States would reverse their decisions to drop Medicaid coverage. They couldn't tell pediatricians to recommend RIC, since HIV is irrelevant to the health of children, who are of course the patients (whatever parents may think), but they wanted something to give the CDC political leverage in the health insurance debate. It took the AAP five years to square this circle and come up with the current dog's breakfast.

    In itself, the policy "change" will make little difference. It's actually ob/gyns who perform most of the 1.2 million US circs. And you'd have to be a true believer to think that this will have any effect on HIV levels of US blacks anytime, ever.

    But as they say, only in America ...
    I knew it! They were pandering to political interference!

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to VicPark For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (30-08-2012),BaronessM  (31-08-2012)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-12-2012, 17:09
  2. American Horror Story
    By bada in forum Movies / Music / Books / TV Chat
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-05-2012, 09:03
  3. Government Backs Gay Marriage?
    By Guest in forum News & Current Affairs
    Replies: 107
    Last Post: 13-12-2011, 23:10

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Babybee Prams
Save $50 in our pre-Christmas sale! All Comet's now only $500. Our bassinet & stroller set includes free shipping AUS wide, $75 free accessories, 18-months warranty & a 9 month free return policy. Check out our new designer range today!
sales & new stuffsee all
Bub Hub Sales Listing
HAVING A SALE? Let parents know about it with a Bub Hub Sales listing. Listings are featured on our well trafficked Sales Page + selected randomly to appear on EVERY page
featured supporter
L'il Aussie Prems Foundation
An Australian charity supporting families of premature babies & children. The charity assists families who are at high risk of giving birth prematurely, who have babies currently in hospital and families with toddlers who were born too soon.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!