Thursday, March 13, 2008

Circumcision: A "New" Defense Against HIV!

Oldest documentary evidence for circumcision comes from Egypt

Not really new actually! This so-called new defense have been practiced since say...ancient Egypt. Male circumcision cuts the risk of HIV transmission in men by about 60%. A 2006 study suggests, circumcision could prevent about 6 million HIV infections and 3 million deaths over 20 years. Still, WHO held back its recommendation until recently (so WHO is the one who causes so many deaths?).

Circumcision is thought to prevent infection because the underside of the foreskin is rich in immune cells that are particularly vulnerable to HIV. Small tears in the foreskin during intercourse can also allow the virus to slip into the body. Moreover, circumcision could reduce the odds of an infected man's transmitting the virus to a female partner by 3o percent or more.

Don't worry! It's not that PAIN!!!

For all its benefits, though, WHO cautions that it should not replace standard methods of prevention like the use of condom. Hmm...Why not? But I recommend both of course!

After the cut, your wife will be
more happy know... ha =)

So guys, for the sake of your wife and girlfriend, get yourself circumcised! Ouch! It will hurt a little, but it's better than letting those HIV roams freely (if any). =)


Anonymous said...

The link between HIV and the foreskin has been debunked. Its an old wives tale. There were problems with the statistics of the WHO study that was done in Africa. Its nice to believe in short cuts and magic cures but to do so only raises the danger. Ignorant people want an easy way out and will think they can just go for a snip and everything will be fine. Nothing can replace safe and responsible sex. The WHO knows it. Promoting anything else is simply irresponsible.

Tekkaus said...

Yupe, it will only reduce 60%. meaning that's still a massive 40% to be infected by HIV virus! =)

But if we use condom, circumcise and do not involve in multiple partner I'm sure this will be better. Thanks =)

TLC Tugger said...

You need to forget about the supposed 60% protection. For one thing, other better studies have come to the opposite conclusion. The Kenya, Uganda, and South Africa controlled trials were all NOT double-blind. They were all halted early while the cut and uncut infection rates were still converging after the cut men's period of post-surgical abstinence. And they were all conducted by people with a long history of promoting circumcision.

For another, the results simply don't accord with reality - no predictive power. In Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Tanzania, HIV is markedly more prevalent among the circumcised. In many non-cutting nations throughout Asia and Europe AIDS rates are lower than in mostly-cut places like Japan and the US. MOST of the dead US male victims of AIDS were circumcised at birth.

Circumcision does not prevent AIDS. In fact, in the "60%" studies they also found that HIV+ cut men were MORE likely to transmit the virus to women than HIV+ intact men were.

HIS body HIS decision.

The UN can give away condoms for 3 cents each.

TLC Tugger said...

Sorry, I meant site Israel, not Japan, as a mostly-cut place. Indeed, Israel at 95% circumcised has higher AIDS incidence than Japan where routine circumcision is almost unheard of.

Tekkaus said...

Wow! Really? Thanks for the info! =)