Male Circumcision and Health Care Costs

Some “doctor” by the name of Aaron Tobian claims that the declining rate of male circumcision in the US will cost untold billions in health care costs. Among his claims:

In a report to be published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine online Aug. 20, the Johns Hopkins experts say the added expense stems from new cases and higher rates of sexually transmitted infections and related cancers among uncircumcised men and their female partners. They say the study is believed to be the first cost analysis to account for increased rates of multiple infectious diseases associated with lower rates of male circumcision, including HIV/AIDS, herpes and genital warts, as well as cervical and penile cancers. Previous research focused mostly on HIV, the single most costly disease whose risk of infection is decreased by male circumcision, a procedure that removes foreskin at the tip of the penis, hindering the buildup of bacteria and viruses in the penis’ skin folds.

Fortunately, all the commentators on that site are having none of this man’s idiocy.

So, these doctors want to amputate an organ – the foreskin – selected for by evolution for very good reasons. But they know so much more than evolution; I think this is what’s known as playing God.

They also believe that it will increase the rates of HIV infection. Well, virtually all of the cases of HIV infection in this country are confined to homosexual men and intravenous drug users. Yet they advocate cutting of the tips of every little boy’s penis in order to stop diseases for which much more efficacious ways of prevention exist. However, they don’t dare suggest any of those other ways because they would be on the receiving end of a shitstorm from the usual suspects; advocating mass amputation of little boys’ penises carries no such penalty however.

It’s high time that the mutilation of infant boys, based on nothing but 3,000-year-old ignorance and superstition, be stopped by legal means. No parent or other authority should have the right to mutilate their children, who should be above their age of majority to consent to such an operation.


Leave a Comment:

Matra says August 27, 2012

The American Academy of Pediatrics is also about to announce a change in its stance on circumcision from neutral to pro. The timing is interesting, though possibly coincidental, given the growing sentiment in Europe in favour of outlawing the procedure/ritual for non-medical purposes. Believe it or not this has been one of the biggest issues of the summer at conservative blogs. They claim this anti-circumcision sentiment is due to (surprise!) rising European anti-Semitism!

Mangan says August 27, 2012

Matra: If this has been the big thing at lots of conservative blogs, I’m even more afraid for the fate of the Republic.

Glad you found my blog.

Add Your Reply