Doctors and circumcision

UK here and born in the mid 60s. I'm not circumcised, and nor was anyone else at my school that I saw. It's never been questioned, or suggested that I should, though as far as I can recall as a child I never had any medical exams that checked my penis anyway. I did get bad eczema on my foreskin for a while as a teenager, but I was too embarrassed to tell anyone, but apart from that had no problems with the foreskin.

I'm very against it and so are my colleagues

I'm very against it and so are my colleagues

We know you are. You do know that it has been shown that uncircumcised male intants have a higher incidence of UTIs though?

Because of the long urethra (compared to women), males have much less chance to have a UTI.

The cases I see of male UTI (foreskin or not) are not many compared to the female patients.

We know you are. You do know that it has been shown that uncircumcised male intants have a higher incidence of UTIs though?

To me, that argument is like one for prophylactic tonsillectomy to reduce the incidence of strep throat.

Here's one source of information with some commentary. Yes, it's anti oriented http://www.circumstitions.com/Utis.html

Because of the long urethra (compared to women), males have much less chance to have a UTI.

The cases I see of male UTI (foreskin or not) are not many compared to the female patients.

You did know that uncircumcised male infants have a higher incidence of UTIs?

No need to repeat the same question

To me, that argument is like one for prophylactic tonsillectomy to reduce the incidence of strep throat.

You know that I don't believe in prophylactic tonsillectomies. I did see a case of fatal carcinoma of the tonsil though!

To me, that argument is like one for prophylactic tonsillectomy to reduce the incidence of strep throat.

You know that I don't believe in prophylactic tonsillectomies. I did see a case of fatal carcinoma of the tonsil though!

So, you liken it to circumcision to prevent carcinoma of the foreskin?

All these foreskin restoration sites are full of people who are so happy their foreskin is gone...

But again, if people are happy being cut, why not, I'm happy for them

So, you liken it to circumcision to prevent carcinoma of the foreskin?

Of course not. It was merely local color. By the way, I read the article. I've heard about Dr. Wiswell. He is regarded highly and what a great name!

I am 52 and uncircumcised. At the time I was born it was a common procedure and as I understand it the hospital put quite a bit of pressure on my father to have it done. He was uncircumcised and saw no need to have it done to me which did not sit well with the medical staff who felt all boys had to have it done. Even though it was not a religious issue for us as we are Christian, my father did consult with the minister at our church who saw no issue one way or the other and mentioned his sons weren’t circumcised either.

In all these years I have never had a UTI or other issue associated with not being circumcised. Early on my father always mentioned the need to maintain good hygiene and clean myself to avoid problems. It has worked. I did have an uncle (father's oldest brother) who was circumcised as an adult due to getting a tropical infection while serving in the South Pacific during the Second World War.

Foreskin restoration? That's crazy!

Foreskin restoration? That's crazy!

Of course it is, it's not even a real foreskin

Of course it is, it's not even a real foreskin

I'm curious, do you know what tissue they harvest to make the ersatz foreskins?

A patient of mine is stretching and stretching all the time what was left after being circumcised. The new created skin (from cell multiplication during stretching) is already halfway his glans.

There is no reconstruction of the foreskin possible through plastic surgery

Shaft skin by taking advantage of Davis' law.

Shaft skin by taking advantage of Davis' law.

Indeed

Stretching combined with testosterone propionate cream that is applied to the glans to make it moistured again

There is no reconstruction of the foreskin possible through plastic surgery

I just read that they do foreskin restoration using skin from the scrotum.. Apparently it is a four stage operation. gives unsatisfactory results and is very costly.

This thread reminds me of a joke about the moyle who came to do a bris (circumcision). When the father paid him, he pulled out a lovely wallet. The father admiring the wallet asked if it was calfskin. The moyle replied that it was foreskin. "Very convenient, when I rub it it turns into a suitcase!" Oh well...

Some of the devices are interesting. One is similar to the Gomco device without the crushing. You place the device over the glans, stretch skin over it and apply circumferential tape. Another uses weight worn down a leg. Still another is like a hernia truss, stretching the penis and skin laterally via an elastic belt.

I just read that they do foreskin restoration using skin from the scrotum.. Apparently it is a four stage operation. gives unsatisfactory results and is very costly.

Ending up in a mutilated penis. There is a problem with skin color and the fact that hair is growing on the scrotum. Nobody likes a foreskin with hair on.

While it might be technically possible, the result wouldn't look good, and of course it's important that a penis looks good.

Penile aesthetics are critical 😉

The (public) medical establishment in the UK seem pretty anti-circumcision these days. Even for medical reasons like a tight foreskin of phimosis, it seems to be very much a last resort, only after all other possibilities have failed, at least as far as the NHS (public health service) is concerned. Private services are of course available, and religious circumcisions are done where relevant.

There is no earthly reason for a publicly funded health care system to spend money on unnecessary surgery. Even phimosis is treatable without amputation.

I agree about public funds going for circumcisions which are not medically indicated. In the U.S., I do not think medical insurance should pay for neonatal circumcision, it should be paid for by the parents who decide to have it performed.

I have 2 younger brothers. Both would be in their 30s today. Our mother regarded our bodies as our own, not hers, therefore, she made no permanent decisions over them. My immediately younger brother got the procedure done to control an infection when he was 12.

I disagree with the concept wholeheartedly. And certainly not on a defenseless baby, who has no concept of his place in the world yet. How could anyone willingly or ethically subject an infant to that kind of pain and mutilation?

I wouldn't put my kids through circumcision unless there were a medical reason for it. I couldn't fathom a baby going through that kind of pain.

I had it done when I was an infant. I can't say that I remember anything about it, pain or anything else.

That being said, I do wish it wasn't done. If I ever have children they won't be getting it done. I think it's just not needed.