- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What is the latest OT sentiment on circumcision for infant male children?
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:28 pm to SabiDojo
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:28 pm to SabiDojo
quote:
At what age does the surgery become too much of a risk? What if a child is 6 or 7? 5?
After 21 days, the risk of bleeding increases enough that we do not do them in the office because the patient needs to be monitored more closely.
The general risk is still quite low, but the benefits are low and mainly cosmetic to begin with.
That said, as the child ages, even into adulthood, the psychological effects- kid who showers at school and gets tormented by other kids, adult who just can't stand it/has a traumatic experience with a female (neither particularly common or even cases I've seen, but theoretically plausible) could be bad enough that it's still well worth the risk. It's a very simple procedure but just needs closer monitoring in the hospital rather than being sent home an hour later.
Outside of coexisting morbidity and understanding that cosmesis is the main benefit achieved with the procedure, the risk basically never outweighs the benefit.
2
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:29 pm to Hopeful Doc
Thank you, doctor
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:29 pm to Nado Jenkins83
i would LOVE to see the responses from the people on this board if this procedure had been invented a few short years ago.
100% would be horrified at the prospect of having their penises modified. Just like they're knee-jerking the opposite reaction because (a) its looks different and (b) throwing a Hail Mary pass at maybe we can draw a correlation to an intact penis to the 20th century's boogeyman, Cancer.
100% would be horrified at the prospect of having their penises modified. Just like they're knee-jerking the opposite reaction because (a) its looks different and (b) throwing a Hail Mary pass at maybe we can draw a correlation to an intact penis to the 20th century's boogeyman, Cancer.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:31 pm to CAD703X
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:33 pm to Nado Jenkins83
What a cohencidence.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:42 pm to baybeefeetz
Don't let your son walk around with anteater
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:45 pm to CAD703X
Some of you are wayyyyyyyy too dramatic about the procedure. There is a ton of Circumcised Guilt in this thread
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:48 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
kid who showers at school and gets tormented by other kids
Uncircumcised children are becoming more and more prevalent.
quote:
adult who just can't stand it/has a traumatic experience with a female
Uncircumcised adults are becoming more and more prevalent.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:49 pm to slackster
Some are way to worried about what some skank thinks. Stick it in and she will close her eyes in pleasure
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:49 pm to baybeefeetz
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:50 pm to CAD703X
quote:
throwing a Hail Mary pass at maybe we can draw a correlation to an intact penis to the 20th century's boogeyman, Cancer.
Not just cancer. Dick cancer.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:51 pm to CAD703X
quote:
would LOVE to see the responses from the people on this board if this procedure had been invented a few short years ago.
100% would be horrified at the prospect of having their penises modified. Just like they're knee-jerking the opposite reaction because (a) its looks different and (b) throwing a Hail Mary pass at maybe we can draw a correlation to an intact penis to the 20th century's boogeyman, Cancer.
So you're saying it would be viewed differently if it wasn't a centuries old societal norm?
Riveting theory!
Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:52 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
If you were to have a son this year, would you have him circumcised
Of course not. Posted on 8/3/16 at 5:56 pm to CAD703X
quote:
Can you with clear conscious admit this was born out of a mystic's ritual? How on earth can modern science attempt to justify this procedure otherwise?
By being born out of ritual or even religion doesn't invalidate science. Again- cosmesis and UTI reduction are significant (and one is a matter of opinion). HIV/STD transmission reduction is quite likely. Effective way of reducing penile cancer (but we are talking about a disease that's rare, anyway). There are a few approaches you can take:
1) it's all bullshite someone did for some reason and I don't find the benefits to outweigh the risk. I feel this is your general view
2) there is a God. He had these weird rules. Thousands of years later, we find out there are reasons why He gave us these rules. A much better example than circumcision with much better and more direct effects would be the Kosher Laws. They undoubtedly saved lives and protected The Faithful from horrible diseases and premature death (I'll expand if you would like).
3) the best scientists were the early clergy who bullshitted everything about the Judeo-Christian God, noted trends (like people eating pork or shellfish dying from improper storage) and made up the rules to remain in power. This approach, of course, kind of makes it difficult when it comes to circumcision because I don't think there were ever clear and obvious benefit where those who were circumcised thrived and those who didn't died or were terribly disease-stricken in biblical times. It would lead me to believe that some combination of both 1 and 3 exist as a single rule where these early clergy who were really brilliant scientists who didn't believe in a God also liked to make things up because they could.
But again, many of those silly rules/rituals had very good reasons and make great scientific sense. On nothing but science alone, I'd happily perform this procedure on anyone's child who wanted it given they understood the risk/benefit and spend little to no time persuading those who didn't want it, again after making sure they understood the risks/benefits. To contrast, I'll spend however long it takes when it comes to other topics, like vaccinating children or properly nourishing them (like in the vegan crowd who aren't able to adequately supply b12 and the kid appears clinically malnourished/delayed as a result).
Posted on 8/3/16 at 6:01 pm to dmjones
quote:
Uncircumcised children are becoming more and more prevalent.
I am aware. Single-parent households are becoming more and more prevalent, too. That doesn't mean it can't be the cause of psychological stress. I'm not suggesting these are logical things that society should accept as OK. But what I mean to say is that it absolutely can be a psychological stressor enough that the benefit outweighs the risk. Look at my number one reason for saying I would have it done to my own son: cosmesis. It's not much different in terms of risk than removing a big mole from a kid's face, which also is not harmful but cosmetically pleasing to most people.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 6:02 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
I'm circumcised, but I don't think I will circumcise my boy(s) when I have kids. The foreskin actually has a functional purpose during sex, and it protects the glans while you're not having sex, preventing keratinization (and thus desensitization) of the glans from friction with clothes and other surfaces.
Yes, technically circumcision can reduce the risk of a few complications, but in my research, I've found that those benefits are overstated in public (layman) discourse.
I'm a few years off from having kids, so I'll probably continue considering this, and I'll consult doctors before the fact to make a final decision.
Spot on. I'm in the same boat. I'm cut, but u I think it's an antiquated practice. We didn't evolve with a foreskin without a
Reason
A big reason I won't cut him, circumcising can decrease sensitivity. This was partially why it became so popular in America. One of the doctors that founded Kellogg cereal promoted circumcision as a way to stop boys from masturbating (google Kellogg and circumcision). I can say first-hand, it doesn't stop it.
Maybe some guys here need decreased sensitivity. Personally, I want my son to keep every never ending. Those nerves could be the difference between a great or awkward ending to a long night of drinking.
This post was edited on 8/3/16 at 6:04 pm
Posted on 8/3/16 at 6:06 pm to CCTider
quote:
Another huge reason that you didn't mention, is circumcising can decrease sensitivity
There is no way to prove this one way or the other, but studies actually suggest there is no real difference either way.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 6:08 pm to saint amant steve
quote:
Men who aren’t circumcised can also lower their risk of penile cancer by practicing good genital hygiene.
Ain't nobody got time for that.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 6:09 pm to CCTider
quote:
a way to stop boys from masturbating (google Kellogg and circumcision). I can say first-hand, it doesn't stop it.
:rimshot:
Posted on 8/3/16 at 6:09 pm to CCTider
quote:
A big reason I won't cut him, circumcising can decrease sensitivity. This was partially why it became so popular in America. One of the doctors that founded Kellogg cereal promoted circumcision as a way to stop boys from masturbating (google Kellogg and circumcision). I can say first-hand, it doesn't stop it.
Phrasing.
This post was edited on 8/3/16 at 6:09 pm
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News