Cut VS Uncut

The majority of women (in the U.S. at least) MUCH prefer circumcision. For that reason alone, I'd rather be "cut." If I wasn't, I'd probably have the procedure as an adult.

I think if you have a large and generally aesthetic penis, it is definately worth being "cut." The forskin just distracts.

Here are some of the reasons you might not want to get a circumcision

http://www.circumstitions.com/Botched1.html

dude im sorry but some of those pictures are totally bogus.....first off necrotizing fascitis is caused by strep which would be a wound contaminant.....considering women carry GBS in their vaginal canal and many people are obligate carriers of GABS it was not DUE TO the circumcision.....

also the vericose veins thing is crap.....those arent even varicose veins. Varicose veins are due to incompetent valves, which are squeezed shut during erection anyways.....yes there can be scarring, but some of those pictures looked kinda suspicious for a healed chancre of syphillis.....not having a circumcision makes you a higher risk for STDs, squamous cell carcinoma of the penis, become infected with HPV, chlamydia, phimosis, UTI's, balantitis (inflammation of the head).....of course practicing safe sex will get rid of the STD risk, but very few people practice true safe sex.....50% of men infected with chlamyidia are asymptomatic and 20% that are symptomatic will have such slight discomfort they wont seek medical attention......then if they infect a female they can cause anything from minor infection to peri-hepatic inflammation called fitz-hugh-curtiss syndrome which can cause scarring of the fallopian tubes and infertility. It can also cause infertility in the male......i have actually seen torn foreskin from guys that are too rough and the pain and amount of blood is enough to make me cringe.....i can understand why guys feel strongly about not being circumsized and as i said before I didnt want to have my sons circumcized at first but after seeing so many complications there is no way i wouldnt have them get circumsized

I would be interested to see the scientific research that validates this statement. I can think of so many variables in individual behaviour and circumstances that would render any results pretty much meaningless. The problem with this type of statement (and in other threads, Baseball, you talked about the importance of saying "may") is that people take generalisations to be facts.

It is a fact that circumcision was popularised in the US by the lunatic Dr.Kellog for the sole purpose of making it more difficult for young men to masterbate.

How much money does the medical profession generate by perpetuating this procedure?

i just think circumcision is wrong unless it's your personal choice.
i'm circed but would rather by intact, people should be punished for mutilating babies right at birth.....

E

Previously id always been with cut guys and swored it never touch an uncut cock. However my current guy is uncut and i love it. I like the feeling of the way it moves in my hand and the feeling of the slick gliding sensation it has. And also not having to worry about a handjob running dry..much better

the has to do with the increased WBC's in the area, the minor inflammation produced by bacterial overgrowth under the foreskin. Even if you shower multiple times during the day the bacterial growth under the foreskin is high, just like in the armpits......there is no may in that statement

how much money does the medical profession generate? much much less than people running to the ER bc they have a cough.....but i can also say the cost of a circumcision as an adult or treating some of the other complications i have scrubbed in on are much higher cost, much higher risk, much higher pay for the physicians than a simple circumcision of a baby

I as a nurse see no medical reason for circumcision. Nor does my husband who is a physician or his brother, also a physician. The US is one of the few countries doing this procedure on a regular basis, and that is changing.
There are far, far more uncircumcised men in this world than circumcised. This procedure may be done for religious reason, or personal reasons, but there is a reason for the foreskin, it serves a purpose.

When problems arise, and if there is no alternative, then circumcision may be necessary.
Certainly it is something that any adult male has the right to do without guilt, it is his body.
I don't know anyone in my circle of the medical community that feels it is a medical necessity. Maybe it's just California? Tho I doubt it.

Could you elaborate? WBC's would be where? Inflammation of the arm pits from bacteria? (in addition to the normal flora ?) How would that affect sweat glands?

If one were to culture the bacteria under the foreskin, what would the finding be?

Well if GBS is in the birth canal don't you think it could get on a baby and infect that wound that's being made on his penis for no reason? Nevermind how many infections come from all surgery performed in hospitals, infection shouldn't be a risk for any unnecessary surgery.

There is a difference between a varicose vein and a varicocele. A varicose vein is formed when the blood needs to find a route. This will happen if there is too much pressure on a blood vessel or if the blood vessel has been severed. A varicocele is cause a dialated vein cause by a faulty seal that shuts.

Much of that information is taken directly from my urologist who I have spoken with, at length about varicoceles. Nothing personal, but I have to trust the person I know actually went to medical school. Why don't you post a picture of your degree?

varicose veins are due to faulty valves, your urologist should know that, its simple physiology.....the physiology behind a varicocele is similar and can range from anything from renal cell carcinoma to normal physiology. they are most common on the left bc the left testicular vein drains into the left renal vein, whereas the right testicular vein has a more direct route to the inferior vena cava, making backup pressure much less likely

and as for my medical degree i refuse to post personal inforamtion of myself on a public forum

its fine your opinion is different....

Author: Mark A Crowe, MD, Assistant Clinical Instructor, Department of Medicine, Division of Dermatology, University of Washington School of Medicine Coauthor(s): Mark A Hall, MD, Staff Physician, Dermatology Service, Walter Reed Army Medical Center



"Sex: Males develop the disease most often, with a male-to-female ratio of 3-25:1.

• Uncircumcised men develop chancroid more often than circumcised men. Patients who are uncircumcised do not respond as well to treatment as those who are circumcised. "

that was one quick example i came up with.....im honestly too busy to look up more information to sustain an argument that is pointless.....I know i will always recommend circumcision. i know physicians that dont, but they are a minority.....maybe my area is different? doubtful tho


also you dont read close enough, i didnt say armpits are inflammed, i said no matter how often you shower, your armpits will have a higher amount of bacteria than most other parts of your body.....relate that to foreskin.....i have seen unpublished research at universities that there are higher levels of s.aureus, s.epi, even psudomonas.....there was even higher levels of e.coli.....if there isnt an increased risk for infection, why would balantitis be found almost exclusively in uncircumcised? why would the risk for UTI's be increased?

Like I said, I am going to take the medical advice of my urologist who has his degrees posted in his office.

I don't know where you live, but I know that in America doctors have stopped performing circumcisions as a normal procedure. It's only done for religious reasons, at the insistence of the parents and when there is a medical need (Except in some of the Southern states maybe).

This is a site written by a doctor who cited his sources.

http://www.noharmm.org/problem.htm

not true.....again im not here to debate relentlessly on a topic thats going nowhere.....i just dont think people should be claiming that there are absolutely no consequences to being uncircumcised.....yes there are some consequences to being circumcised but they are relatively rare.....theres probably higher rates of GI bleeding or kidney damage due to NSAIDs.....and about the sources, i am not attempting to publish material here.....my sources are from Bates, Robbins, Harrisons, and other clinical references.....i dont have the time nor care enough to find and post all the sources.....and anyways, im not from the south

Let me add to this thread that will never end. Just a thought for many of you to ponder. If bacteria grows easier in a uncircumsized man, because bacteria has more of a chance to develope under a mans foreskin, then doesn't bacteria have a better chance to develope in a womans vagina because she has vaginal lips ? Don't think so. I think bacteria becomes a breeding ground on men and women who do not keep those areas clean. If extra skin was the problem, doctors would be clipping those lips off right and left.