Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Cut vs. Intact Outcome Statistics


Out of 100 Circumcised boys:

75 will not readily breastfeed post-op

55 will have adverse reactions from the surgery

35 will have post-op hemorrhaging to one degree or another

31 will develop meatal ulcers

10 will need to have the circumcision surgery repeated to fix prior surgical problems/error
8 will suffer infection at the surgical site

3 will develop post-operative phimosis

2 will have a more serious complication (seizure, heart attack, stroke, loss of penis, death)

1 will require additional immediate surgery and sutures to stop hemorrhage

1 will develop fibrosis

1 will develop phimosis

1 will be treated with antibiotics for a UTI (urinary tract infection)

1 will be treated with antibiotics for surgical site infection

Of those who do receive pain medication for the surgery (about 4% of those boys undergoing circumcision in the U.S.) some will have adverse reactions to the pain medication injected



Out of 100 Intact boys:

2 will be treated with antibiotics for a UTI (fewer if the foreskin is never forcibly retracted)

1 will be told to get cut later in life for one reason or another (fewer if the foreskin is never forcibly retracted)



Note: One reader of these statistics (a man cut against his will at birth with 4 intact sons today) critiqued (quite accurately) that it is actually 100 of 100 circumcised boys who experience negative consequences as a result of circumcision. Each and every one has lost an organ responsible for a great deal of his life-long normal health and functioning.





Statistics above are the averages from all studies examining the health outcomes of circumcised vs. intact boys between 1989-2009. These studies are highlighted in the following references.


Books:

Doctors Re-examine Circumcision

Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy

Circumcision: A History of the World's Most Controversial Surgery

Marked in Your Flesh

Circumcision: What Every Parent Should Know

A Surgical Temptation

Children's Genitals Under the Knife

Circumcision: The Rest of the Story

What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Circumcision

Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma

Circumcision Exposed

Questioning Circumcision: A Jewish Perspective


Online:

Cirp.Org/Library/Death

Dangers of Circumcision Report (pdf) at DoctorsOpposingCircumcision.org

Circumstitions.com/Complications

NoHarmm.org/complicationsUS


Labels: , , Posted by JK

33 comments:

  1. PHENOMENAL!!! Its about time that it got broken down this simply!
    ReplyDelete
  2. I wrote a post on circumcision yesterday -- looking at it from the perspective of female "circumcision" -- and if you wouldn't want that for yourself and wouldn't do it to your daughter, why would you do it to your son?

    -Kathy
    ReplyDelete
  3. This is extremely near and dear to me, my husband and I are both HUGE intactivists. Now I have come across a woman who is trying to get her 18 month old son circumcised because there wasn't enough skin to do it at birth. This should not be something that insurance approves, it should be something the doctor REPORTS to CPS.
    ReplyDelete
  4. Love this!!

    - proud mama of a whole boy!
    ReplyDelete
  5. Amen! I live in an area (the Midwest) where we have a 90% circumcision rate. You can imagine the "tsk tsks" from people when they discovered my son was intact. I honestly don't care what people think--I am not about to do a cosmetic procedure on a newborn baby who was born perfect just the way he was.

    Thanks for bringing awareness to this issue.
    ReplyDelete
  6. I am amazed at how many people think this is an acceptable practice. Can you imagine getting ANY part of your body cut off without pain medication, never mind a piece of your genitals? I think if more people KNEW what really happened during a circumcision - like how infants have their arms and legs strapped down - they may choose differently. This is a practice that was adopted to prevent boys from masturbating (which obviously doesn't work:-). It has no medical reasoning and in my opinion is not much different than female genital mutilation.
    ReplyDelete
  7. There it is in black and white. Not only is it barbaric to cut off a piece of a baby's penis, but also has many negatives. I'd love to see these statistics plastered all over drs offices.
    ReplyDelete
  8. And this is where the reality of circumcision meets the medical profession. Especially in America, doctors benefit financially from this non-therapeutic surgery and therefore have a vested interest in minimizing the language of risk and/or suppress actual data outright.

    As always, you are spot-on.

    I highly recommend another childbirth educator's blog post on the topic:

    http://womantowomancbe.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/circumcision-guidelines/

    Extremely effective perspective shift.
    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks for the post! I'd like to see more stuff on here about circumcision. People still think it's going to lower STDS and UTI rates to circumcise....sigh.
    ReplyDelete
  10. Sarah - the rate of MGM in the Midwest has dropped (thankfully) to 65% as of 2008 (according to national hospital surgery statistics and is likely lower as we enter 2010). It continues to fall as parents become educated prior to their son's birth. However 6-7 out of 10 babies being cut up at birth is still WAY too high. Thank you for protecting your own son. We need MUCH activism in the Midwest.

    I did a lecture tour at Universities (human development and childhood education courses) in IA/WI/MI/IL this past fall and the response from students was overwhelmingly positive. Change CAN be made - we just have to be willing to talk about this difficult subject and spread accurate information - not lies, myths and misconceptions that the media loves to jump on.
    ReplyDelete
  11. Strwberryjoy - Thank you for the encouragement. Your comment made me smile because we have oodles here on the subject of circumcision - more, in fact, than any other general parenting site and this sometimes gets people 'upset'... Some don't like coming face to face with MGM in the U.S.

    If you go up to the search feature on the left hand side of this blog, you can type in various words (such as 'circumcision' or 'circumcised' or 'intact' or 'foreskin' or 'pain') and come up with more articles that apply to this subject.

    On the topic of sexually transmitted infections (and HIV) here are a few recent links (most of them also have additional links to more reading at the bottom of the article):

    Dr. Dean Edell on HIV: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/10/dr-edell-discusses-africa-aids.html

    HIV increases among men who were cut in Africa: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/hiv-increases-in-africa-where-most-men.html

    HIV increases among female partners of men who were cut in Africa: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/07/african-hiv-circumcision-study-ends.html

    Public policy cite HIV: http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/

    HIV: http://www.mothering.com/health/truth-about-circumcision-and-hiv

    UTIs: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/12/how-foreskin-protects-against-uti.html

    http://drmomma.org/2009/08/here-we-go-again-new-york-times.html

    If you haven't already read "The Functions of the Foreskin" it is a basic 101 on the prepuce that everyone should read. :) http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/functions-of-foreskin-purposes-of.html

    And this video, "CUT: Slicing through the myths of circumcision" (made by a Jewish filmmaker) answers a LOT of the "STD" myths out there: http://www.cutthefilm.com/Cut_Website/The_Film.html

    FGM and MGM share a similar history of myths in the US: http://drmomma.org/2009/09/history-of-female-circumcision-in.html
    ReplyDelete
  12. Just an update on my previous comment -- that post now has the list of AAP doctors (with their emails) who are currently considering whether or not to recommend routine infant (male) circumcision. Please email them now -- after they make the decision, it will be too late! Feel free to copy & paste the names & addresses from my blog into this post or another post.

    http://wp.me/p9IBz-Nq

    -Kathy
    ReplyDelete
  13. DrMomma: I am glad to hear that the rate has dropped. I am trying to educate more people, but it's so hard to change minds. Most people's reason for doing it is so that their baby won't be "different" and that is just plain sad. Evolution would tell me that if there was something "wrong" about a part or if it wasn't needed, it wouldn't still be there.
    ReplyDelete
  14. http://pharmtips.com/2008/11/27/dispelling-myths-about-circumcision/

    http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/

    ---

    Blissfully intact and a PROUD intactivist!

    Twitter: @light_peak
    ReplyDelete
  15. What a great post. Is that truly what a baby who is circumcised looks like right after? All of them or is that just a bad one? I didn't have the heart to look at pictures or video of procedures. We knew way ahead of time that we would not be getting this done. My Mom is the only one who pushed for it because "uncircumcised penises look gross". I told her I had yet to see a penis I found particularly "attractive". Anyways, great post and I hope you don't mind me quoting it or directing people to it next time the debate comes up!
    ReplyDelete
  16. Emmalie and Aidan's Mom -
    Yes, this is what a typical cut and intact newborn's penis looks like. There is nothing unusual about the circumcised penis in this photo - except that it shows the genital mutilation of a human baby in close detail. And I'm not sure this could ever be considered anything but 'bad'. :(
    ReplyDelete
  17. Sarah - keep up the good work! Every single baby saved is a human life changed - and generations that are spared from such atrocities continuing. You touch more lives than you probably realize. If you are not already in the peaceful parenting group on FB, you can find many other parents in your shoes there. (Link on the side of this page). Or, if you'd like me to introduce you (in online fashion) to more intactivists in WI and the Midwest, I'd be happy to do so. They have lots of great ideas going around. Find me there on FB as well - http://www.facebook.com/drmom and just let me know *who* you are. ;)
    ReplyDelete
  18. Alyssa G: I know how you feel. An acquaintance of mine decided to get her adopted son circumcised recently - I think the surgery was just done yesterday. Even after I asked her to read the literature about this issue on 'peaceful parenting', she still went through with it. The poor little guy is 32 months - just a few days older than my little girl - I feel horrible for him!
    ReplyDelete
  19. This post omits things for which we have good anecdotal evidence but not data: a penis damaged for life by scar tissue or glans damage; difficulty with adult erection because of too little skin; difficulty enjoying intercourse, especially after age 40.

    Circumcised men have a tendency to thrust harder, faster, and deeper during intercourse. This detracts from the women's pleasure, in ways that are impossible to measure but are real nonetheless.

    The head of pediatric urology in a major American teaching hospital told a friend of mine that about 25% of her caseload consists of repairing damage from routine circumcision.
    ReplyDelete
  20. My son is not circumcised. The skin never "pulled back" as they said it would. When he was 12 yrs. old he began experiencing pain because the skin was too tight. I brought him to a pediatrician who recommended that he be circumcised immediately. I was appalled and refused to believe that there were no other options. I found a pediatric urologist in our area who prescribed a topical medication to be applied 2x daily...and in six weeks...VOILA!! Problem solved. The transformation was amazing! The skin now pulls back normally. No pain, no cutting. I want as many people to hear/read my story, because our sons deserve better!!!
    ReplyDelete
  21. This is a very straightforward way to put it - thank you!! I have been exploring the circ issue myself on my own blog a lot over the past few months... it is such a deep issue, and it is unfortunate that people tend to brush it off as "no big deal." I wonder if seeing this list of stats would change some minds... I hope it would!

    To Alyssa G - not having enough skin to circ the baby at birth would, to me, mean that he doesn;t need to be circed *ever*. My mother was told the same thing about my youngest brother in 1988... that there wasn't enough skin for them to feel comfortable doing it, so she should go to a pediatric urologist. When she did, they told her that she should just leave him as he was, that circing was not necessary anyway, so she did. And... he grew up thinking he was circed! So, just think of how much more likely the damage would be on a boy who has less than average amount of skin there in the first place! Maybe you could convince this mom that since her baby has less skin to begin w/, he may end up looking more circed than intact anyway, so why ct off even *more* of his skin??
    ReplyDelete
  22. Hi! Thanks for posting this. I'm trying to convince a friend not to circ his son, and I'd love to send this to him, but he'll want to know the source/s. Can you add that to your post somewhere?
    ReplyDelete
  23. Interesting read from Glick's "Marked in Your Flesh": "that the Lord's covenant and his two definitive promises (prodigious reproduction success and a lavish land grant (all of Canaanite land) appears first in Genesis 15, an earlier J text but with one crucial difference, there is no mention of circumcision." "To seal this covenant the only requirement is that Abram offer several sacrificial animals- a heifer, goat, ram, dove, and one other bird. Here we find no mention of circumcision, no change of name, no mention of Isaac or Ishmael." "Like a number of their neighbors, the ancient Israelites had practiced circumcision, but not as a mandatory rite and probable seldom on infants; nor did they associate it with the idea of covenant."

    It was the Judean Priests who wrote Genesis 17 (P text) 13 centuries after Abraham's putative lifetime that called for male circumcision of infants. A initiation rite not so much for the infant but of the father who must circumcise his son himself for he is cognizant of the event whereas the infant is not. These type of circ.s were the cutting off the acroposthion (the part that hangs past the glans). No damage of tearing the foreskin from the glans (thus results scarring from the cut up to the tip of the glans) and no amputating the part covering the glans. The radical circ., also medically known as penile reduction, as we do happens centuries later. The Torah says not to mark the body, the original Covenant jives with the earliest Judea.
    ReplyDelete
  24. I'm so glad that we left our sons intact. Our midwife told us that there was no medical reason to perform circumcision, and we followed her advice. After reading your post and hearing other information, I feel so very confirmed in that decision.
    ReplyDelete
  25. I am so happy that I stuck to my guns. My husband wanted our son circumsised and I didn't. I couldn't even think of putting him through that pain right after going through the stress of being born, pushed through the canel and being out in the world instead of warm and snug inside me, having to work for his food instead of it getting directly to him. I asked about it at my dr appts, read some stuff on it, found there really is no medical reason, and when I asked my husband why he wanted it done, really his only reason he could come up with was because he was....i asked other moms and a lot of them said they just left the decision up to their husbands because they didn't have a penis, so thy let the dads make the decision. if I would have done that, my son would not be intact just because his dad isnt...once my husband saw a picture of how the baby gets strapped down, and how the penis looks right after it was cut, he came to my side of the fence, luckily! ugh! Reading even more in depth about it, here, makes me feel so greatly that I stood up for my child's rights to stay intact!
    ReplyDelete
  26. Great information...I'm sure if parents really knew the dangers they would keep their boys intact. Not to mention the way it must effect Sex in America. So glad my Son is intact.
    ReplyDelete
  27. I couldn't agree more with the fact that circumcision doesn't need to be done. Proud mama of a whole baby here too!
    ReplyDelete
  28. Thankyou for posting this information. We have a three year old daughter and are planning on trying for our second in a year. I know that if we have a boy i do NOT want to have him circumcised but my husband still believes that there are benefits to circumcision and that getting circumcised later in life would be more painful.
    Jessi
    ReplyDelete
  29. I am so happy for all of you who learned these things before your sons were born. I have 2 boys and I had them circ'ed, truly believing at the time it was the best thing. I live with agonizing guilt over it. If I have more boys they will be spared, and maybe I can help others along the way learn more about this. Thanks for sharing!
    ReplyDelete
  30. @Prizill - you're not the only one! I've found a lot of support and people in our same shoes at some of the groups and pages listed from this site:

    http://www.drmomma.org/2010/05/i-circumcised-my-son-healing-from.html

    We have two sons who were circumcised before we knew better, and two who are intact. So I know your feeling too well...
    ReplyDelete
  31. i have learned a lot from reading all of the posts here as well as all of the statistics. i dont have kids of my own yet, but now firmly stand with the belief that there my boys will never be circumsized. My younger brother(adopted at 9 months) was never circumsized. it was a topic of discussion for a long time between my parents and i(im 14 yrs older). my mom and i stood firm that there was no reason why he should be circumsized and that he will grow up the same as other boys. my dad had other ideas, but eventually saw our point. at age 8 now my brother is growing up just fine and is a happy intact boy and i think could be a great rolemodel for my boys in the future if questions of the sort ever arise. thatnk u all for ur input and info and making me a firm 'intact' believer now :)
    ReplyDelete
  32. I just have to say as a mother of 4 boys all circumcised I wish I would have known then what I know now. I just did it because I thought it was no big deal and that's just what we should do here in the US. Thankfully all the boys are okay but they under went a needless procedure and painful. I am a labor and delivery nurse now and strongly encourage my patients to seek out education and not circumcise their little boys. Thanks for sharing and all the research articles.
    ReplyDelete
  33. I agree with the reader who said 100% of circumcised boys will experience adverse effects. They will all become men who will not experience full sensation during intercourse and whose penises will never function as nature intended. A great post on the functions of foreskin found here:

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/functions-of-foreskin-purposes-of.html

    I honestly cannot believe with all of the evidence out there that this is still being debated at all. Breaks my heart:(
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails