SpeedRacer 1 #1 December 13, 2006 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6176209.stm Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaoskitty 0 #2 December 13, 2006 Interesting article... .. but then there's this: "Dr Kevin De Cock, director of the HIV/Aids department of the World Health Organization told the BBC.." Seriously?? aaaahhaha I love it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bazelos 0 #3 December 13, 2006 Well this thread should be fun!He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matt1215 0 #4 December 13, 2006 If circumcision were so beneficial, its practice in the US wouldn't be confined to only male children. There's a prevalent double-standard in our society that never ceases to baffel me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #5 December 13, 2006 QuoteIf circumcision were so beneficial, its practice in the US wouldn't be confined to only male children. There's a prevalent double-standard in our society that never ceases to baffel me. So you are pissed off that men are cut and women aren't? You prefer women cut? Interesting... Most men just prefer em shaved. www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
caspar 0 #6 December 13, 2006 just a thought but having your cock bludgeoned by a surgeon is a pretty good reminder about aids (i say this because with aids numbers so high people out there must be forgetting or ignoring it or something)... that and the downtime from healing... could these skew the findings that they have found? i know there is a true medical basis for what theyve found, but i wonder how accurate the findings are when considering less sex etc"When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matt1215 0 #7 December 13, 2006 I'm pissed off that us guys are cut and happy that women aren't. I find the practice of cutting boys equally as disgusting as cutting girls. In a perfect world, circumcision wouldn't be a widespread practice period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,490 #8 December 13, 2006 QuoteIf circumcision were so beneficial, its practice in the US wouldn't be confined to only male children. There's a prevalent double-standard in our society that never ceases to baffel me. This post bears absolutely no relation to the content of the article. The article is about a study on male circumcision only. Finding a benefit from it in no way implies a benefit from female 'circumcision.' (BTW, I'm not circumcised and would never do it to any kids I may one day have - but your post doesn't make sense)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #9 December 13, 2006 No...in a perfect world all women would have their tongues pierced at birth. edited to add: Oh yeah and no gag reflex either.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
caspar 0 #10 December 13, 2006 Quotein a perfect world all women would have their tongues pierced at birth. i have a book where i jot down little gems i hear people say whether they are inspiring, wrong or just funny. i jot down little things people say in passing and sometimes from dz.com and that just made it in right at the top of the page"When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #11 December 13, 2006 QuoteI'm pissed off that us guys are cut and happy that women aren't. I find the practice of cutting boys equally as disgusting as cutting girls. In a perfect world, circumcision wouldn't be a widespread practice period. Male circumcision!=Female Genital Mutilation... Penile cancer occurs in uncut men almost exclusively. I never heard of smegma until I saw it in a medical textbook. Not cutting must be a Euro thing.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FlyingJarhead 0 #12 December 14, 2006 ya right im sure just 50% of the circumcisions went to far Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #13 December 14, 2006 QuoteQuotein a perfect world all women would have their tongues pierced at birth. i have a book where i jot down little gems i hear people say whether they are inspiring, wrong or just funny. i jot down little things people say in passing and sometimes from dz.com and that just made it in right at the top of the page That's awesome! You should start a thread and share some of the best ones with us. www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildcard451 0 #14 December 14, 2006 Circumcision is purely a cosmetic procedure in the US where our rates of infection are dramatically lower. Didn't even read the article, don't have time right now. As far as effective as a vaccine against penile cancer? Well, without looking it up I believe that the incidence of penile cancer is something like 1:100,000 people so that NNT (number needed to treat to prevent one case) is way to high to justify giving that as a reason. Do I tell every mother of every kid that I cut that it is purely cosmetic? Yup. Have I started informing them of recent law suits of men against their parents for cutting em? Yup. Do almost all of them still do it? Yup. Why? Most common reasons are traditional, ie the dad going "Well I am and my daddy was so by god he will be to".....assuming that the dad is there, which is a sad rarity, but that is another story....to the mother preferring the look of a cut penis in their own personal experience.... Here's the one that is really going to get you by the balls/ovaries: Even though circumcision is now regarded by the american academy of pediatrics as a purely cosmetic procedure, in I believe about 35-40 states it is still covered by medicare. That means your tax dollars are paying for a cosmetic procedure. More and more states are moving against it, but we still have a long way to go. /this post was written in a flurry, so not everything may be 100% correct Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thunderbow 1 #15 December 14, 2006 Am I the only one that noticed the name of a doctor quoted in the article? "Dr Kevin De Cock">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lord, let me be the person my dog thinks I am. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #16 December 14, 2006 QuoteHave I started informing them of recent law suits of men against their parents for cutting em? Yup. WTF??? Anyway, I've heard some women don't like to give BJs to un-circumcised men. Definitely something to think about. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #17 December 14, 2006 Quote Male circumcision!=Female Genital Mutilation... True. Male circumcision=male genital mutilation. It's removal of a part of the penis for cultural and/or religious reasons. QuotePenile cancer occurs in uncut men almost exclusively. Please report a modern source for this. Preferably one that doesn't also show rising cases among the circumcised population and declining cases among the uncircumcised. QuoteNot cutting must be a Euro thing. It's more like cutting being an American thing. 80-85% of males in the world are uncircumcised. Of course depending on your definition of "almost exclusively", this could explain why most cases of penile cancer are found in uncircumcised men...perhaps as much as 80-85 percent of cases! Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #18 December 14, 2006 Quote As far as effective as a vaccine against penile cancer? Well, without looking it up I believe that the incidence of penile cancer is something like 1:100,000 people so that NNT (number needed to treat to prevent one case) is way to high to justify giving that as a reason. I was going to mention this, but it sounds better coming from a doctor (Google reports 0.8 per 100,000...you were damn close). On the legal aspect, how do you medical types shield yourselves from being sued for performing an unnecessary procedure for cosmetic purposes on a person who could not give consent and had not previously expressed wishes on the subject? I'm absolutely not suggesting you should be sued, just wondering how the defense works. I have to imagine that if a parent asked you to remove their newborn girl's clitoral hood, you'd decline on legal grounds, right? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
caspar 0 #19 December 14, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuotein a perfect world all women would have their tongues pierced at birth. i have a book where i jot down little gems i hear people say whether they are inspiring, wrong or just funny. i jot down little things people say in passing and sometimes from dz.com and that just made it in right at the top of the page That's awesome! You should start a thread and share some of the best ones with us. in time, always writing down quotes and then losing the notes. this book is big but still pretty new.. i'll give you an example, the last entry before your quote: "go on caspar, please fuck my cousin! just do it! at least let her suck you off" by my housemate to me, at his houseparty infront of maybe 10 people in my room with his cousin next to him nodding happily! that quote is shortened, he was wrecked and wouldnt stop pestering me for 20 mins on the subject and tried to bribe me all infront of her...anyway i thought that was odd. (she was a Fugly) sorry to butt in the convo, you guys need to chill anyway. nothing's going to change, as much as it bugs you, society isnt going to change anytime soon."When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #20 December 14, 2006 >"Dr Kevin De Cock" True story - First woman at MIT was named Ellen Swallow Richards. President at that time was Richard (Dick) Cockburn McLaurin. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wonderwoman07 0 #21 December 14, 2006 From a Biology Major --The reasons that circumcision reduces infection is because the foreskin contains certain types of cells that are more susceptible to HIV infection than cells in the keratized (thiker/tougher) layer of skin that is present after circumcisions. The tougher layers also helps reduce infection becuase it is just that, tougher -- less likely to get damaged and provide a route for infection -- damage also recruits immune cells, which are the main target of HIV ---Circumcision doesn't prevent someone from getting HIV, however, if you are not circumcised, you have a higher chance of becoming infected. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildcard451 0 #22 December 14, 2006 QuoteFrom a Biology Major ---Circumcision doesn't prevent someone from getting HIV, however, if you are not circumcised, you have a higher chance of becoming infected. Show me the study. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bazelos 0 #23 December 14, 2006 QuoteQuoteHave I started informing them of recent law suits of men against their parents for cutting em? Yup. WTF??? Anyway, I've heard some women don't like to give BJs to un-circumcised men. Definitely something to think about. Hahahahahaha....it started already Every time there's a circumcision post in an internet forum, it's always a heated willy waving debate, I find it stupid that cut guys are trying to make uncut guys feel that they won't be getting much because they are uncut, and vice versa.He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildcard451 0 #24 December 14, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteHave I started informing them of recent law suits of men against their parents for cutting em? Yup. WTF??? Anyway, I've heard some women don't like to give BJs to un-circumcised men. Definitely something to think about. Hahahahahaha....it started already Every time there's a circumcision post in an internet forum, it's always a heated willy waving debate, I find it stupid that cut guys are trying to make uncut guys feel that they won't be getting much because they are uncut, and vice versa. Different strokes for different folks. Literally. The only real practical information I give mothers about it is that for the first 6 months of life an uncut male has the same uti risk as that of a female, but after that it drops off to normal risk. Some women like it cut, some like it swinging in the breeze like the day it was made. I've heard all answers. By the way mother fuckers are popping kids out where I work, I'd say both version of cock seem to work as intended. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thunderbow 1 #25 December 14, 2006 That's why I don't post much. I'm either late or wrong.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lord, let me be the person my dog thinks I am. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites