In the United States the
rate of circumcision in men has increased to 81% over the past decade. In an
important new study just published in advance in Mayo Clinic Proceedings
authors from Australia and the United States have shown that the benefits of
infant male circumcision to health exceed the risks by over 100 to 1. Brian
Morris, Professor Emeritus in the School of Medical Sciences at the University
of Sydney and his colleagues in Florida and Minnesota found that over their
lifetime half of uncircumcised males will contract an adverse medical condition
caused by their foreskin.
Whereas circumcision rates
have risen in white men to 91%, in black men to 76%, and in Hispanic men to
44%, the study authors found an alarming decrease in infants. To get the true
figures they had to correct hospital discharge data for underreporting. This
showed that circumcision had declined from a high of 83% in the 1960s to 77%
today.
There seemed to be two
major reasons for the fall.
One is a result of
demographic changes, with the rise in the Hispanic population. Hispanic
families tend to be less familiar with the custom, making them less likely to
circumcise their baby boys.
The other is the current
absence of Medicaid coverage for the poor in 18 US states. In those states
circumcision is 24% lower.
Professor Morris stated,
“The new findings now show that infant circumcision should be regarded as
equivalent to childhood vaccination and that as such it would be unethical not
to routinely offer parents circumcision for their baby boy. Delay puts the
child’s health at risk and will usually mean it will never happen.”
In infancy the strongest
immediate benefit is protection against urinary tract infections (UTIs) that
can damage the kidney in half of babies who get a UTI. Morris and
co-investigator Tom Wiswell, MD, Center for Neonatal Care, Orlando, showed last
year that over the lifetime UTIs affect 1 in 3 uncircumcised males.
In a landmark systematic
review, Morris, with John Krieger, MD, Department of Urology, University of
Washington, Seattle, showed that there is no adverse effect of circumcision on
sexual function, sensitivity, or pleasure. This helped dispel one myth
perpetuated by opponents of the procedure.
Taken together, the new
findings should send a strong message to medical practitioners, professional
bodies, educators, policy makers, governments, and insurers to promote this
safe, simple procedure, best done in infancy under local anesthesia and to
increase access and third party coverage, especially for poor families, who
tend to suffer most from foreskin-related diseases. Infant circumcision has,
moreover, been shown to be cost saving.
No comments:
Post a Comment