Probably it was just an one off, but would anyone admit it?
Should Circumcision be banned?
- Thread starter dkwrtw
- Start date
Probably it was just an one off, but would anyone admit it?
I think that guys horrific ordeal was a once off.
But there are some very interesting reports on increased erectile dysfunction amongst circumcised males:
http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/
But they're not conclusive. It seems there's an equal amount of evidence that points to the contrary.
As I said in a much earlier post, it doesn't seem to affect men either way, broadly speaking. However, the justification for the procedure is highly fallacious.
With the cutting of the umbilical cord and given it has much more nerve endings and more blood vessels- how much pain do you think the baby has then? How different is it subduing the baby to a less painful procedure given skin doesn't have tons of nerve endings ( more nerve endings= more pain) during circumcision? :willy_nilly:
well the difference being that the umbilical cord heals quickly. The penis takes a long time to toughen up. So until it does, it's going to hurt.
But umbillical cords fall off after a few days anyway, just look up Lotus Births where the umbillical cord and placenta stay attatched to the baby for days after the birth so that they can naturally fall off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_birth
Foreskins don't, normally, fall off.
mine did. I replaced it with putty.
not by experience but by looks- aren't they much more attractive circumcised?:willy_nilly:
Yes. I agree. :nod:
I agree :nod: this can be a never ending debate . I respect the opinion of others not in favor of circumcision as everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions.
I on the other hand is just sharing medical facts based from experience and with no intentions of causing unnecessary heated arguments
Such medical info which doesnt provide definte conclusions can influence others towards the direction against circumcision and I can't blame them. However, the example of erectile dysfunction can't just be attributed to circumcision as there are a lot of factors that can cause that
Further studies and evidences needed to be provided for someone to say conclusively it's circumcision per se that caused such a dysfunction
obviously you've never seen mine. If you get hold of an electron microscope, I'll let you look.
I agree :nod: this can be a never ending debate . I respect the opinion of others not in favor of circumcision as everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions.
I on the other hand is just sharing medical facts based from experience and with no intentions of causing unnecessary heated arguments
Such medical info which doesnt provide definte conclusions can influence others towards the direction against circumcision and I can't blame them. However, the example of erectile dysfunction can't just be attributed to circumcision as there are a lot of factors that can cause that
Basically because the studies aren't conclusive in either direction, you can safely assume there aren't any benefits either way.
So in that sense, what's the point? Why rob someone of some part of their body without their consent?
as I mentioned in that reply- I am only sharing based from experience and what I've seen with patients! You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that
as I mentioned in that reply- I am only sharing based from experience and what I've seen with patients! You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that
No one else here does. I like you.
You're talking like your friggen lopping off an arm... It's extra skin FFS thats done so early in the stage of life you don't even remember it.
This is from your link....
" On April 27, 1966, a urologist performed the operation using the unconventional method of cauterization. The procedure did not go as doctors had planned, "
.... enough said.
But why take it off? No one up to this point has offered a valid reason why, other than social conditioning.
Ed you remind me of a Pit Bull that won't let go.
There's lots of other reasons have been given. Go back and read 'em.
Ed you remind me of a Pit Bull that won't let go.
and all refuted.
Why is social conditioning not a valid reason?
Refuted by the naysayers and not the ones that are for it in case you didn't know. That's what happens Ed when you're so entrenched in your own ideas you don't see the side of others. Pretty tough to have a logical discussion that way imo.
Apparently it isn't according to Ed.