I absolutely will not...
Started by Doula-2-OB
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
I would guess most have, probably why circumcision is advocated so much. 
I would guess most have, probably why circumcision is advocated so much.
Hahaha. See I don't get that - I think uncut penises are more attractive. Not to mention there are some quite obvious sexual benefits to it (but then only obvious if you have one/been involved with one).
I guess I only ask because I think if someone saw one they would see that the whole health benefits thing is bogus. I'll agree its a personal choice - do what you wish, but people trying to claim health benefits to something they know nothing about it just ignorant. Probably why i found the whole thing to be so funny.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I think MCW still does... I remember reading a blog from a student last year that mentioned it. I'm right there with you.
wow the only threads that get this long are about peekaboo dicks and AA
1
112258
I would guess most have, probably why circumcision is advocated so much.
Hands.Down.Agree.
No offense.
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) has published a list with those medical schools who still do use live animals (in most cases dogs)...I have posted the links for you. Thankfully they are becoming rare, and hopefully will be eradicated in all medical schools very soon!
http://www.pcrm.org/resch/meded/ethics_medlab_list.html
http://www.pcrm.org/resch/meded/ethics_med_list.html
http://www.pcrm.org/resch/meded/ethics_medlab_list.html
http://www.pcrm.org/resch/meded/ethics_med_list.html
i think you should all ask my roommate what he thinks of circumcision after his own was botched as an infant. that would probably give you all a completely different view on the topic. botched circumcisions are not at all uncommon.
im pretty apathetic on the topic, but it really seems like the pro-circ people really have no idea what it is like to have a foreskin, and they are making up facts. i'd expect more from people who may one day become doctors.
im pretty apathetic on the topic, but it really seems like the pro-circ people really have no idea what it is like to have a foreskin, and they are making up facts. i'd expect more from people who may one day become doctors.
If we are all saying we advocate what we're packing... it seems like the anti-circ crowd would have an idea what a foreskin is. I think I'm confused by the wording of your post.
On a lighter note, I never read this thread back in November... great resurrection, seriously. I laughed out loud.
If you don't get circumcised you'll get lint stuck in there your whole life.
I'll take my foreskin and the sensation I get from it.
LOL, the people talking about a lifetime of cleaning and crap. What you guys don't wash your pee pees? I never had an infection.
There are sites against circum due to loss in sensitivity. I know for sure my glans would harder and toughen up a bit if they were constantly chafing against my clothes.
But hey, if thats the case, why not remove the clitoral hood because it can get pretty dirty under there.
LOL, the people talking about a lifetime of cleaning and crap. What you guys don't wash your pee pees? I never had an infection.
There are sites against circum due to loss in sensitivity. I know for sure my glans would harder and toughen up a bit if they were constantly chafing against my clothes.
But hey, if thats the case, why not remove the clitoral hood because it can get pretty dirty under there.
How not at all uncommon is that?
Well, since someone exhumed the thread... let me weigh in here as a circ'ed guy and say that some of us ARE bothered by having had the choice taken away by our parents. Yeah, my folks have heard a piece of my mind on this one.
Do I know that I'd be better off if I hadn't been cut? No, but I've definitely hit some non-sexual situations where being a bit "better protected" down there would have helped, and it's not to begrudge the missing erogenous tissue.
Assuming I make it through the whole "getting into med school" process, I think it's really unlikely that I'll end up in a position to be doing circumcisions (or any other kind of infant genital surgery; for all that we don't do "female circumcision in this country," take a look at the treatment of intersex infants) ... but given if I am, I would have serious reservations about performing circumcisions on infants.
Do I know that I'd be better off if I hadn't been cut? No, but I've definitely hit some non-sexual situations where being a bit "better protected" down there would have helped, and it's not to begrudge the missing erogenous tissue.
Assuming I make it through the whole "getting into med school" process, I think it's really unlikely that I'll end up in a position to be doing circumcisions (or any other kind of infant genital surgery; for all that we don't do "female circumcision in this country," take a look at the treatment of intersex infants) ... but given if I am, I would have serious reservations about performing circumcisions on infants.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Yeah I don't think I'd do what they all do in India and get my child's ears pierced until they are at least 5 or 6 and I can ask if they want to wear earrings.
One of my good friends is an OB/GYN. When she was in med school she had a patient, a teenage boy, who underwent circumcision due to some problems secondary to phimosis. The story goes awry on the first morning post-op, when his glans penis is stitched and bandaged, and he experiences a standard case of adolescent morning wood.
As she so eloquently put it, "we all came running because you could hear the screams down the hall."
Circumcision, like every procedure, has pros and cons. If done in the post-natal period it's about as quick, simple and safe as surgical procedures get. Does this make it 100.00000% safe? No, it doesn't. So you have to weight the risks with the benefits. Also, you have to understand that if, for any reason, circumcision has to be done later in life, the complexity of the procedure (and concomitant risks of complications) increase significantly.
So what are the risks? There are the usual risks of surgery: bleeding, unwanted tissue destruction, infection, etc. The child might also grow up feeling some vague sense of violation. Potential loss of an erogenous zone.
What are the benefits? Ease of procedure (if an infant). Enhanced cleanliness. No chance of phimosis, infection or inflammation of the glans. Reduced chance of squamous penile cancer. Apparently reduced transmission of certain STDs to sexual partners.
In summary, there are arguments for and against, and I personally see no compelling reason not to allow the parents authority to decide.
As she so eloquently put it, "we all came running because you could hear the screams down the hall."
Circumcision, like every procedure, has pros and cons. If done in the post-natal period it's about as quick, simple and safe as surgical procedures get. Does this make it 100.00000% safe? No, it doesn't. So you have to weight the risks with the benefits. Also, you have to understand that if, for any reason, circumcision has to be done later in life, the complexity of the procedure (and concomitant risks of complications) increase significantly.
So what are the risks? There are the usual risks of surgery: bleeding, unwanted tissue destruction, infection, etc. The child might also grow up feeling some vague sense of violation. Potential loss of an erogenous zone.
What are the benefits? Ease of procedure (if an infant). Enhanced cleanliness. No chance of phimosis, infection or inflammation of the glans. Reduced chance of squamous penile cancer. Apparently reduced transmission of certain STDs to sexual partners.
In summary, there are arguments for and against, and I personally see no compelling reason not to allow the parents authority to decide.
humpty bumpy...
I would be scared to have my kid circumcized after reading As Nature Made Him, the story of the Reimer twins. The one poor kid lost his whole penis and underwent sex change surgery at Johns Hopkins to be made into a girl and yet through his whole childhood never identified with being a girl and was so confused about who he actually was. When he found out at 14 that he was really a boy, he went back to being a boy, but he had to undergo phalloplasty and mastectomy (since he had been given estrogen). He ended up committing suicide when he was in his thirties. Yeah...I'd be scared to have my kid circumcized.
As far as anesthesia, I definitely think babies should be numbed before undergoing circumcision. The doctor who circumcized my brother wasn't going to numb him, but my mom made him!
As far as anesthesia, I definitely think babies should be numbed before undergoing circumcision. The doctor who circumcized my brother wasn't going to numb him, but my mom made him!
Penises look hilarious whether they're cut or not. Naked men are the funniest things on the planet, especially when they're trying not to look funny.
i will NEVER perform an abortion that isn't medically necessary. i absolutely believe the woman has the right to choose...and this woman has chosen to have nothing to do with it.
i will NEVER perform an abortion that isn't medically necessary. i absolutely believe the woman has the right to choose...and this woman has chosen to have nothing to do with it.
Yes dozens of papers on pubmed and hundreds of reports are bogus. You are right. It'd ridiculous when people try to argue this like they try to argue religion, you have nothing but ancetodal evidence on your side, when scientific evidence supports the very benign procedure of male circumcision in populations as an excellent way of reducing STIs. 🙄
ha ha ha - who cares?
Maybe it's just me, but condoms seem like a much easier way to prevent STDs.😕 (and much more effective, too)
oh yeah and me, I wouldn't do post-second/third trimester abortions (based on the growth of neural tissues/heat-beat) unless the woman's life was at risk. The first trimester, it's a ball of... well... cells. I believe 3rd trimester and even 2nd trimester abortions are illegal in most places though anyway, anyone enlighten me?
STI is a generally preferred and more encompassing term. Condoms are an effective way to prevent the spread of STIs without a doubt, but if you could define "easier?"
When you are dealing with public health you want to take as many measures as possible to protect the population without invading individuals rights. That includes introduction of proper hygiene, STI prevention methods (e.g. condoms) and other means...
This is a very non-invasive procedure, and benign, inexpensive preventative measure, it has no side-affects other than the ancetodal claims of reduced sexual pleasure (the same is said of condoms no?). Study after study has shown to have great benefit in terms of reducing STIs, specially ones like HIV, in large populations. There is no equivalent of such procedure for women (the female circumcision has been shown to increase the risk of infections).
If I wanted to draw an analogy I would compare it to wisdom teeth, however, the case here is that it has been shown that on a large scale the procedure not only benefits the individual but benefits the population as well. That's why I don't think that doctors should only take a neutral position, but should actively support the procedure.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
It is illegal for women to stand within five feet of a bar while drinking.
Using a firearm to fish is strictly forbidden.
Citizens may not take showers on Wednesdays.
You may not take a picture of a rabbit from January to April without an official permit.
http://www.bitoffun.com/stupid_laws_Wyoming.htm
hmm what is their definition of "viable"? I should research American policies on abortion a bit more before talking out of my ass. Do you mean 3rd trimester is only illegal in one state...?
They're funny, but they all had reasons behind them at the time. Not saying they aren't absolutely dated and completely hilarious, but AT ONE TIME there was validity to them
Kept the fairer sex from being involved in drunken bar brawls that our men pretty much have the market cornered on. They neglected to realize, however, that the line between a Wyoming native woman and a man from pretty much any other part of the country is VERY faint, and the "foreign" women were usually the cause of said brawl
People actually did this. Is it sadder that it's a law, or that it actually needed to be.... 😕
ohh now that one's just silly...not a clue
Kept the fairer sex from being involved in drunken bar brawls that our men pretty much have the market cornered on. They neglected to realize, however, that the line between a Wyoming native woman and a man from pretty much any other part of the country is VERY faint, and the "foreign" women were usually the cause of said brawl
People actually did this. Is it sadder that it's a law, or that it actually needed to be.... 😕
Enacted during a period of prolonged, extreme drought, as a method of water conservation.
ohh now that one's just silly...not a clue
They're pretty loose on their interperetation (keep in mind i don't know anything about the rest of the country, just my teeny little patch of it), but from what i've read, i think it's open to interperetation. If this particular infant COULD survive outside of the womb, it's considered viable.
i THINK. Could be totally off on this one, but i haven't found anything to really clarify it.
I think our laws are pretty tame compared to those - all of Canada has fewer stupid laws than some US states alone.
http://www.bitoffun.com/stupid_laws_Canada.htm
http://www.bitoffun.com/stupid_laws_Canada.htm
cutting off your penis also prevents STD and penile cancer.....
the point is your sacrificing a part of your penis for a very small gain, it should be up to the owner of the said penis to decide.
I can just see it, 5000 years from now...."and this is a sacred chamber, where ritual sacrifice of penile parts was performed in front of the gods of fire..."
Christina Ricci AND her surgeon should both be punished. She should have to take her perfect, wonderful breasts back, and he should be shot.
That, and the oral piercing.well...yes. FOR NOW! i'm about 20 minutes from the Colorado border, though, so that makes me MUCH cooler
WTF!? She had a reduction? WHEN!? I just saw "Prozac Nation" a few months ago and she's got some topless scenes there...I was very impressed...was that before or after the reduction?
I can just see it, 5000 years from now...."and this is a sacred chamber, where ritual sacrifice of penile parts was performed in front of the gods of fire..."
hahahaha Damn you made me snort out my refreshing green tea out on my laptop 🙁
Alright dude, I provided a perfectly rational explanation, as did others. But you seem to be stuck in a realm of hyperbole, yes removing people's heads would also get rid of STIs but that is not the point, I am not going to argue. 😎
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
It's been...a couple years at least...i put it down under "crimes against humanity" but no one would effing listen 😡
Oh man, I was volunteering the other day, and this chick came in, wearing a shirt that said "It's cute how stupid you look..." and then she turned around and she had the BACK OF HER NECK pierced....right above her vertebra! All I could think was,"the irony...."
Yeah, I've had a few women tell me I should consider a reduction...they are just worried about their boyfriends....
If you look - you'll find dozens of papers that have proven that the health benefits are bogus. It all depends what you're looking for. There are a few more that support the benefits than refute them but thats only because it was such a common procedure that they've been trying to prove that its good for you much longer than they've been trying to prove its not The most recent studies on HIV are somewhat compelling but with the ridiculously low rate of HIV in straight white American males - it really doesn't make much sense for the majority of the population.
Even the American Academy of Pediatrics admits that the studies currently done are not sufficient to recommend automatic circumcision of infants, and ultimately conclude its the parents choice. http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3b103/3/686
But good job on not knowing the full story and just following the sheep.
Oh and my original statement that if you saw one you would know the health benefits were bogus was specifically referring to the cleanliness part - an uncut penis is no dirtier than a cut penis.
